On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:07:26PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:27:01PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote
> > On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:15:57 -0400, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
> > > I really don't want to damage any "signature" on the extended partition
> > > that is needed to access the "sub-partitions" it contains. As I said
> > > my newly installed gentoo resides on those sub-partitions.
> > Why is a new installation using a 1980s partition scheme?
> Is that you, Lennart? But seriously, if it works, why junk it?
New software could be:
* more efficient
* technically better (i.e. GPT is technically better than MBR)
* have new features that you don't think you need but come in handy
If your system works, why do you update it? Unless you actively need the
update, you're just wasting cycles.
> Before I retired, I had to put up with Windows at work. Every new
> version totally re-arranged the user interface system admin stuff to the
> point that enough of "everything you know is wrong" that you have to
> re-train your employees. Great if you're a commercial "Windows Trainer"
> that charges big buck, but lousy if you're a business that has to pay
> for retraining.
> Here's my question to you... why should we junk software that works,
> i.e. it does what we need? I want a real reason. The fact that it's
> old is not a justification. Neither is "teh shiney".
See above. Also, "teh shiney" is a valid reason. This is how software
(and everything in general) moves forward. Couple examples:
* linux: The very definition of "teh shiney." Started by a university
student for fun. snowballed into the beautiful thingy we all use every
* ruby: Started because Matz could not find a language that was perfect
for him. Now it powers loads of websites.
I will agree that software being old is not a valid reason for getting
rid of it. My ctags is 6 years old - doesn't bother me. It just works,
but I would update if I could simply because it would most likely be