On 3-8-2012 11:18, [email protected] wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012, Henry Vermaak wrote: >> On 03/08/12 09:43, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: >>> Because not everybody feels the need to "fix" what isn't broken. Why >> >> Lol, you owe me a new keyboard. No updates for 6 years from MS, no >> journalling filesystem (no ntfs). Stop talking out of your backside. >> >> I personally think it's immoral to support these operating systems. >> People should be forced away from them for their own good (security >> wise), since they obviously know no better. By supporting them, you >> just drag out the process. > > The problem is very practical: Graeme comes from South Africa. His > clients are schools, distributed over South Africa and probably the rest > of Africa as well. > > Upgrading costs money. These people simply do not have the money to > upgrade. > > For westerners, upgrading is natural; we (mostly) do not think about the > cost. > > The clients of Graeme could of course obtain illegal copies of Windows > and upgrade like that. Well, they want to play it fair, and that means: > remain on an old version because they cannot afford the new one. > > An additional problem is probably that their hardware is so old that the > newer versions of Windows simply don't run on it.
Yep. Presumably changing over to (some less resource intensive version - i.e. older or non-mainstream - of) Linux would be possible but would still involve retraining costs/effort. (Only slightly exaggerating: and if you're stuck with Telkom phone lines/ADSL or something even worse, I sympathise with people who want to download Linux CDs). Regards, Reinier -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
