Old PC Technology

[a9127]

Originally Posted by ila

I think ME was a much worse version of Windows than was Vista.

Harvard Graphics wasn't mentioned and I don't consider it a flop. I do wonder what happened to it as it was easy to use and had features that PowerPoint wouldn't have for many years.

Windows ME always puzzled me. There was of course 95, then 98, then ME. I remember "98" as a worthwhile upgrade. But I always wondered if "ME" was only released to take advantage of the hype surrounding "Y2K." It was supposed to stand for "Millennium Edition." No one I know knew whether it should be pronounced "M E" or "mee." I never used it, instead installing "Windows 2000" which was based on the more robust "Windows NT." It's funny that "XP" would come out shortly after in 2001 and be around for so many years. I know businesses that still rely on it.

Harvard Graphics was awesome. The company was probably late in porting it to "Windows" in the 90's or people were just too easily satisfied with PowerPoint. I have found in Business, in general, it's hard to get away from the "Office" suite. That may change in the future.

But do you remember the "Paper Clip"? Maybe one day the "digital assistant" will look like the "Real Doll" I configured in the "Dating" thread.

[ila]

Originally Posted by a9127

Windows ME always puzzled me. There was of course 95, then 98, then ME. I remember "98" as a worthwhile upgrade. But I always wondered if "ME" was only released to take advantage of the hype surrounding "Y2K." It was supposed to stand for "Millennium Edition." No one I know knew whether it should be pronounced "M E" or "mee." I never used it, instead installing "Windows 2000" which was based on the more robust "Windows NT." It's funny that "XP" would come out shortly after in 2001 and be around for so many years. I know businesses that still rely on it.

I always pronounced ME as the two separate letters. I liked XP a lot. It worked so well that many people I know would not give it up until their computer died and they had to upgrade because their new computer came win an OS other than XP. Yes, I was one of them.

Originally Posted by a9127

Harvard Graphics was awesome. The company was probably late in porting it to "Windows" in the 90's or people were just too easily satisfied with PowerPoint. I have found in Business, in general, it's hard to get away from the "Office" suite. That may change in the future.

Harvard Graphics was slow to go to a Windows version, but even after it did PowerPoint in any version would not convert HG Windows to PowerPoint.

Originally Posted by a9127

But do you remember the "Paper Clip"? Maybe one day the "digital assistant" will look like the "Real Doll" I configured in the "Dating" thread.

I remember that annoying paperclip all too well. Like BOB, it always popped up at the most inconvenient time and far too often. I was glad to see that paperclip finally disappear.

[a9127]

Not everything is “in the cloud.” “Mainframe”? Remember those? They’re still around…

This was in my inbox this morning. From “eWeek”:

“In essence, the reason that the mainframe has thrived for well over a half century is because IBM has reinvented it time and again to support the evolving needs and business requirements of its enterprise customers. That ability to evolve in order to support the evolution of others is clear in the Tailored Fit Pricing for IBM Z offerings that the company announced this past week.

So how exactly has IBM altered the mainframe over the years? For the first three decades, the company’s path was fairly conventional. The mainframe, after all, began as a digital complement to the mechanical calculators and other transaction-focused business machines that were central to IBM’s success. Over time, new technologies, including increasingly powerful database and middleware offerings, were used to extend the mainframe’s ability to support and extend emerging business applications.

Then in the mid- to late-1990s, IBM began exploring uncharted territory with its decision to formally and financially support Linux and other open source technologies, beginning with its (then named) zSeries mainframes. The decision was not universally popular—in fact, some IBM board members believed Linux would destroy the mainframe’s value. History proved those naysayers to be as utterly wrong as they were shortsighted.”

[a9127]

This was in my Twitter feed this morning. Party like it's 1985! Fuck yeah. Riiight. More like "gag me with a spoon."

This is "Windows 1.01." If you used a PC back then, you either ran "DOS" by itself or "Windows" that acted as a shell providing a "user friendly" interface.

That "game" is called "Reversi" and appeared on several later versions of windows well into the 90's. I used to be really good at it. How many remember playing it?

I actually sort of like the colors. I think to get this color scheme you had to have an "EGA" card or else it would appear in B/W. Both at an "amazing" 640X480 pixel resolution. My current "desktop" back home uses a "4K" display.

My first real interaction with Windows would not come until 1990 with the "much improved" Windows 3.0. By then, it was posible to get a "VGA" display and have resolutions up to 1024X768, still OK for some applications today. But most monitors of the time were only 14" or 15".

NEC offered a 17" Multisync that I (with money earned from doing computer projects for other people) paid over $1,500 USD for in 1995. Think of what you could get today for that. When we moved out of our old offices last year our university's "IT" department had to call a "recycling" service to dispose of it safely. All monitors back then were "CRT" design. Think "Die Hard" where Bruce Willis uses a monitor strapped to a chair to detonate the explosive in the elevator scene. I'm sure my university would not have appreciated me tossing it down one of our elevators. Although the thought did cross my mind.

Finally, my "favorite" Windows 3.0 theme. This was called "Flourescent" and what I used most of the time. There is also a bright red and yellow theme called "Hot Dog Stand" that still has fans today. I've seen versions for "Windows 10" even. Buy really, why would you want that?

[a9127]

In the earliest days of PC’s, long before YouTube, Twitter, and “Social Media” ever existed, everybody knew that personal computing technology wasn’t ever going to be used for anything “good.”

“Astrotit” was a popular “shareware” PC game from 1987. Especially revealing of just how “primitive” graphics were back then is that each of these screenshots is 320x200 resolution, common for many monitors of the time. Compare it to the screen you’re currently using. Amazing isn’t it?

Note the “Cyan Magenta White” color palette. Unless you owned an “EGA” graphics card, that was it. Until “VGA” became standard a few years later. Offering up to 1024x768 resolution and “unlimited” colors, VGA was the first to be able to show real pictures. Most of them dirty…

[ila]

In 1992 I had a state of the art 14 inch monitor with a 640 x 480 resolution. My VGA card would display 16 colours.

[a9127]

Had to think about what the "oldest" working piece of technology I own is. I think it is a Casio fx-11 "Scientific" calculator from 1974.

This belonged to my dad. I last "fired it up" sometime last year. It takes 4 AA type batteries. Power switch is "iffy" but if you wiggle it enough it will turn on.

One of the most interesting features is the green flourescent tube display and the "little" zeroes. So "ninety" looks like "9o."

(Pictures courtesy of Casio)