[X4U] fellow luddites?

[Linda]

Wait a minute... you asked for our opinions, so why argue with it? What's
that about?

No need to play devil's advocate with me. My post, to which you reply,
didn't imply good or bad of the people who did or didn't move from 68K to
PPC or from OS 9 to OS X. I only said to look at history -- made no judgment
whether history was good or bad!

The "actual danger" that I see is from each side:

1) I don't know anyone using OS 9 who can reliably load web pages over a
dialup connection. Web content has grown, stuff like Flash doesn't go
backwards, and so many sites fall over when viewed in an old browser;
because Apple stopped supporting OS 9, modem scripts haven't been updated in
years, and the OS 9 users I know get disconnected a LOT, if they are able to
connect at all.

2) My G5 can't boot with my SCSI card installed, so how am I to access all
of my Jaz carts and SyQuest carts?

There are problems with moving up, and there are problems with staying
behind. I made no judgments about the worth of either -- only suggested you
look at history and decide for yourself.

~Linda


On 10/30/06 10:52 AM, nk wrote:

> playing devil's advocate here...
> 
> history also contains examples of lots of big users (like ad agencies)
> who froze all purchases beginning late summer of 2000 as the economy
> softened, and didn't upgrade to OS X and all the app versions until
> 2004! In some cases, they're still on older gear and 'ware, and doing
> fine with it. IOW, it still cuts wood for them.
> 
> Are file formats relatively different? will TIFF and EPS be done away
> with? is text still text?
> 
> True, there are cases as with Adobe CS in which the older versions of
> some of those apps won't read files created with the newer.
> 
> But assuming one isn't working with such protectionist software, but
> rather with all the programs one needs, and assuming the internets
> won't convert to some format that absolutely requires THEE latest
> stuff, and assuming that not even gil bates will make electrons behave
> differently...
> 
> what's the actual danger?
> 
> nk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 29, 2006, at 12:32 PM, Linda wrote:
> 
>> You can look at history...