How I use Ideamason - and why
Started by Franz Grieser
on 10/16/2006
Franz Grieser
10/16/2006 6:44 pm
Hi.
A few days ago, Stephen Zeoli asked for a review of Ideamason.
Here is how I use the application (this is no real review but I think it shows the potential of the software):
Ideamason 2.2 is an essential part of the environment I use for writing a novel. In addition to Ideamason I use
* OpenOffice.org Writer plus the German Duden spellchecker for writing (the editing features in Ideamason are rudimentary, and I have Writer set up the way I need it)
* Infoselect 9 for storing background material (snippets e.g. from the Internet, notes)
* SKBackup for automatically creating a backup of all files that I work in to a different hard disk every 10 minutes (this also works for opened files).
Ideamason is the place where everything is put together: I keep notes, ideas/thoughts on the novel, on the characters, dialog, and the current version of each scenes inside Ideamason.
I write the scenes in Writer, each scene is in a file of its own; usually, there are several versions of a scene - I save the files regularly under a new name ("Max meets Anna 01", ...02, ...03, etc.). Before I close a scene file in Writer, I copy the text to Ideamason (thus I always have the current version of each scene in Ideamason). I keep each scene in a separate item ("Idea" as it is called in Ideamason). This way I can easily change the sequence by dragging the scene to its position in the outline. All scenes are assigned the "Scenes" category (I created this category plus categories for my characters, for ideas, etc.). Ideamason automatically creates a folder for each category in the Portfolio Explorer and puts links to the items into these folders. As you can assign several categories to an item, an item can show up in several of these folders.
As soon as the first draft is finished, I will export the text of all the scenes to a Word file: Create a new Composition, open the "Scenes" folder, select all items and drag them into the Composition window, save the composition and export the draft to Word. In Word, I'll save it and open it in Writer for editing.
If you prefer to write all the scenes in one big word processor file, you can create an outline in Ideamason first and export it as an outline to Word. But that's not the way I work.
I also use the composition feature to create backups of my notes (by exporting them to Word).
At the moment, I keep all my notes both in Ideamason and in Infoselect. That has historical reasons and a practical one: The Search feature in Infoselect is much better than the one in Ideamason 2.2. The new Search feature in vs3, however, looks very promising - I will give it a try in my next book project and keep all the notes only in Ideamason.
As I wrote in earlier posts, there are a few things that I miss in vs2.2. The most important feature that is missing (but will be added in vs3) is keyboard shortcuts for commands I constantly use, e.g. for "New Idea" (to create a new scene or note). As soon as Masonware told me they skipped vs2.5 that was planned for September and should bring the keyboard shortcuts, I decided to use the scripting tool AutoHotkey to define the shortcuts by myself. The people at Masonware were so kind as to tell me the shortcuts they plan to use so I could already use them in AutoHotkey.
The features in Ideamason I do not use:
- Sourced Material, i.e. the bibliographic tool - I simply do not need it in my novel (I will surely use it in the next non-fiction project).
- Footnotes/Endnotes - I do not need them now
I found Ideamason to be very stable: It only crashed once in the last months - and I couldn't reproduce the failure.
*** Why I chose Ideamason ***
Caution: That's a long story.
In my daytime job I work mainly on Windows computers (I write articles and books on Windows, software and hardware). I decided to use a different platform for writing my novel - I chose Mac OS X because of the huge choice of interesting software (and because I wanted to give Apple it a try). I bought a number of apps (Ulysses, Tinderbox, Devonthink Pro), which turned out to be a waste of money in the end:
* Ulysses does not work for me: Managing the scenes the way I do is not possible (there are no folders, they are just implementing a kind of filtering system in vs1.5) - and I do not see why I should change my way of working to adapt to their software. What is more: I have no need for their often praised full-screen mode as I usually have other apps (Ideamason/Infoselect now) or windows open for reference, and when I am writing I do not let other things on the screen distract me.
* Learning Tinderbox would have cost me a lot of time - time I wanted to spend writing. I started several times but never really got into it.
* Other writer's editors such as Jer's Novel Writer and Scrivener are nice, Scrivener might develop into something that fits to my way of working, but it's not there, yet. NeoOffice (OK, no real writer's editor) is just now getting usable in Mac OS X - but there is no real advantage over my OpenOffice.org on Windows.
* Devonthink was a worthwile investment, it is comparable to Infoselect.
Switching to the Mac for writing turned out to be a dead-end street for me. It may sound strange but I did not feel at home there. It always felt like driving with the handbrake pulled. And I didn't have my ergonomic keyboard :-). I know in the end I might have learnt to work on my Mac but why spend the time?
So I decided to go back to Windows and stumbled over Ideamason at that moment. Here, I have everything in one place - scenes, notes, the outline (if I want to). I can use the tools I am familiar with. I find myself writing again instead of being stuck.
Franz
A few days ago, Stephen Zeoli asked for a review of Ideamason.
Here is how I use the application (this is no real review but I think it shows the potential of the software):
Ideamason 2.2 is an essential part of the environment I use for writing a novel. In addition to Ideamason I use
* OpenOffice.org Writer plus the German Duden spellchecker for writing (the editing features in Ideamason are rudimentary, and I have Writer set up the way I need it)
* Infoselect 9 for storing background material (snippets e.g. from the Internet, notes)
* SKBackup for automatically creating a backup of all files that I work in to a different hard disk every 10 minutes (this also works for opened files).
Ideamason is the place where everything is put together: I keep notes, ideas/thoughts on the novel, on the characters, dialog, and the current version of each scenes inside Ideamason.
I write the scenes in Writer, each scene is in a file of its own; usually, there are several versions of a scene - I save the files regularly under a new name ("Max meets Anna 01", ...02, ...03, etc.). Before I close a scene file in Writer, I copy the text to Ideamason (thus I always have the current version of each scene in Ideamason). I keep each scene in a separate item ("Idea" as it is called in Ideamason). This way I can easily change the sequence by dragging the scene to its position in the outline. All scenes are assigned the "Scenes" category (I created this category plus categories for my characters, for ideas, etc.). Ideamason automatically creates a folder for each category in the Portfolio Explorer and puts links to the items into these folders. As you can assign several categories to an item, an item can show up in several of these folders.
As soon as the first draft is finished, I will export the text of all the scenes to a Word file: Create a new Composition, open the "Scenes" folder, select all items and drag them into the Composition window, save the composition and export the draft to Word. In Word, I'll save it and open it in Writer for editing.
If you prefer to write all the scenes in one big word processor file, you can create an outline in Ideamason first and export it as an outline to Word. But that's not the way I work.
I also use the composition feature to create backups of my notes (by exporting them to Word).
At the moment, I keep all my notes both in Ideamason and in Infoselect. That has historical reasons and a practical one: The Search feature in Infoselect is much better than the one in Ideamason 2.2. The new Search feature in vs3, however, looks very promising - I will give it a try in my next book project and keep all the notes only in Ideamason.
As I wrote in earlier posts, there are a few things that I miss in vs2.2. The most important feature that is missing (but will be added in vs3) is keyboard shortcuts for commands I constantly use, e.g. for "New Idea" (to create a new scene or note). As soon as Masonware told me they skipped vs2.5 that was planned for September and should bring the keyboard shortcuts, I decided to use the scripting tool AutoHotkey to define the shortcuts by myself. The people at Masonware were so kind as to tell me the shortcuts they plan to use so I could already use them in AutoHotkey.
The features in Ideamason I do not use:
- Sourced Material, i.e. the bibliographic tool - I simply do not need it in my novel (I will surely use it in the next non-fiction project).
- Footnotes/Endnotes - I do not need them now
I found Ideamason to be very stable: It only crashed once in the last months - and I couldn't reproduce the failure.
*** Why I chose Ideamason ***
Caution: That's a long story.
In my daytime job I work mainly on Windows computers (I write articles and books on Windows, software and hardware). I decided to use a different platform for writing my novel - I chose Mac OS X because of the huge choice of interesting software (and because I wanted to give Apple it a try). I bought a number of apps (Ulysses, Tinderbox, Devonthink Pro), which turned out to be a waste of money in the end:
* Ulysses does not work for me: Managing the scenes the way I do is not possible (there are no folders, they are just implementing a kind of filtering system in vs1.5) - and I do not see why I should change my way of working to adapt to their software. What is more: I have no need for their often praised full-screen mode as I usually have other apps (Ideamason/Infoselect now) or windows open for reference, and when I am writing I do not let other things on the screen distract me.
* Learning Tinderbox would have cost me a lot of time - time I wanted to spend writing. I started several times but never really got into it.
* Other writer's editors such as Jer's Novel Writer and Scrivener are nice, Scrivener might develop into something that fits to my way of working, but it's not there, yet. NeoOffice (OK, no real writer's editor) is just now getting usable in Mac OS X - but there is no real advantage over my OpenOffice.org on Windows.
* Devonthink was a worthwile investment, it is comparable to Infoselect.
Switching to the Mac for writing turned out to be a dead-end street for me. It may sound strange but I did not feel at home there. It always felt like driving with the handbrake pulled. And I didn't have my ergonomic keyboard :-). I know in the end I might have learnt to work on my Mac but why spend the time?
So I decided to go back to Windows and stumbled over Ideamason at that moment. Here, I have everything in one place - scenes, notes, the outline (if I want to). I can use the tools I am familiar with. I find myself writing again instead of being stuck.
Franz
Derek Cornish
10/16/2006 10:21 pm
Franz -
Thank you for a very detailed and helpful review. I was especially interested in your decision to move back to Windows from the Mac. I was also intrigued that you are thinking about giving up InfoSelect once IM improves its search feature. I use Zoot for similar purposes (storing, classifying and searching notes) to your use of InfoSelect, so IM's handling of notes is of considerable importance to me - although find it hard to imagine being able to give up Zoot.
I very much agree with you about the need for a backup program that will save open files as one writes. I use Caddais BackupOnDemand (shareware, though; not freeware) for a similar purpose.
I have one or two further questions to ask you:
1. Have you compared IdeaMason with Liquid Story Binder so far as fiction writing is concerned? (IdeaMason has clear advantages over LSB in terms of academic/non-fiction writing - footnotes, bibliography handling, etc).
2. How have you set up OO Writer, and why is it not possible to replicate this in IdeaMason - i.e. what does IM need to add to its editing features to enable you to dispense with OO?
Derek
Thank you for a very detailed and helpful review. I was especially interested in your decision to move back to Windows from the Mac. I was also intrigued that you are thinking about giving up InfoSelect once IM improves its search feature. I use Zoot for similar purposes (storing, classifying and searching notes) to your use of InfoSelect, so IM's handling of notes is of considerable importance to me - although find it hard to imagine being able to give up Zoot.
I very much agree with you about the need for a backup program that will save open files as one writes. I use Caddais BackupOnDemand (shareware, though; not freeware) for a similar purpose.
I have one or two further questions to ask you:
1. Have you compared IdeaMason with Liquid Story Binder so far as fiction writing is concerned? (IdeaMason has clear advantages over LSB in terms of academic/non-fiction writing - footnotes, bibliography handling, etc).
2. How have you set up OO Writer, and why is it not possible to replicate this in IdeaMason - i.e. what does IM need to add to its editing features to enable you to dispense with OO?
Derek
Franz Grieser
10/16/2006 10:33 pm
Hi Derek
I haven't really compared them. I trialled LSB a while ago but didn't find it as convincing as IM when I stumbled across IM.
Mainly 3 things:
* German spellchecking (a general problem with most English/American writer's tools) - I use Star Office and the current Duden spellchecker (because I just received the package from Sun for reviewing in a German newspaper - and it's simply the best combination I have seen so far)
* autocorrection and autotext (both not available in IM so far)
* customized toolbars (e.g. a button for word count) and macros in OpenOffice.org Basic (I don't need them for writing but use them e.g. for converting text I copied from the Internet or from PDF files into readable text)
And I do not think that Masonware should include all this (in particular point 2 and 3) in Ideamason: I want them to improve on the Ideamason side, the word processing side is covered by Sun and the OpenOffice.org community (which I contribute to in Germany).
Bye, Franz
I have one or two further questions to ask you:
1. Have you compared IdeaMason with
Liquid Story Binder so far as fiction writing is concerned? (IdeaMason has clear
advantages over LSB in terms of academic/non-fiction writing - footnotes,
bibliography handling, etc).
I haven't really compared them. I trialled LSB a while ago but didn't find it as convincing as IM when I stumbled across IM.
2. How have you set up OO Writer, and why is it not
possible to replicate this in IdeaMason - i.e. what does IM need to add to its editing
features to enable you to dispense with OO?
Mainly 3 things:
* German spellchecking (a general problem with most English/American writer's tools) - I use Star Office and the current Duden spellchecker (because I just received the package from Sun for reviewing in a German newspaper - and it's simply the best combination I have seen so far)
* autocorrection and autotext (both not available in IM so far)
* customized toolbars (e.g. a button for word count) and macros in OpenOffice.org Basic (I don't need them for writing but use them e.g. for converting text I copied from the Internet or from PDF files into readable text)
And I do not think that Masonware should include all this (in particular point 2 and 3) in Ideamason: I want them to improve on the Ideamason side, the word processing side is covered by Sun and the OpenOffice.org community (which I contribute to in Germany).
Bye, Franz
Derek
Stephen Zeoli
10/17/2006 1:15 am
Franz,
Thank you for your detailed review of IdeaMason. I'm looking to add a new writing environment to my arsenal of software and I'm considering IdeaMason and Writer's Blocks... two different approaches to the same task. I appreciate your insights.
Steve Z.
Thank you for your detailed review of IdeaMason. I'm looking to add a new writing environment to my arsenal of software and I'm considering IdeaMason and Writer's Blocks... two different approaches to the same task. I appreciate your insights.
Steve Z.
Derek Cornish
10/17/2006 5:40 am
Franz -
Yes, I see what you mean. The IM editor seems fine to me for composing text and I would probably use WordWeb with it (though unfortunately it only has an English dictionary, I think), so I tend to agree that development time might be better spent on other aspects.
Kind regards,
Derek
And I do not think that Masonware should include all this (in particular point 2 and 3) in Ideamason: I want them to improve on the Ideamason side, the word processing side is covered by Sun and the OpenOffice.org community (which I contribute to in Germany).
Yes, I see what you mean. The IM editor seems fine to me for composing text and I would probably use WordWeb with it (though unfortunately it only has an English dictionary, I think), so I tend to agree that development time might be better spent on other aspects.
Kind regards,
Derek
Franz Grieser
10/17/2006 9:33 am
Hi.
I forgot to mention one more reason why I prefer a word processor such as OpenOffice.org Writer or Word: These two apps have a Compare Documents feature that is useful for finding out what changes I made between various versions of a document. Writer and Word also have collaboration tools - I think about editing my first draft as a different user on my work machine and using the Track Changes feature in Writer (I do not know the English command name).
Franz
I forgot to mention one more reason why I prefer a word processor such as OpenOffice.org Writer or Word: These two apps have a Compare Documents feature that is useful for finding out what changes I made between various versions of a document. Writer and Word also have collaboration tools - I think about editing my first draft as a different user on my work machine and using the Track Changes feature in Writer (I do not know the English command name).
Franz
Derek Cornish
10/18/2006 12:00 pm
Writer or Word...have a Compare Documents feature that is useful for finding out what changes I made between various versions of a document.
It looks at this point as though Liquid Story Binder may have somewhat more sophisticated tools for editing (e.g., those for comparing versions and marking revisions) than IdeaMason, while IM has better ones for organising and classifying information. As Steve commented, it is encouraging to now have at least three - to include ndxcards - programs that are aiming to provide a more complete writing environment.
Derek
Hugh Pile
10/19/2006 11:00 am
Yes, many thanks for the IM review. It's prompted me to give it an extensive trial.
It's encouraging that software developers are moving towards designing a more complete writing environment. However at the same time it's very frustrating. The ideal outlines (no pun intended) of such an environment are becoming clearer and clearer, yet progress towards them seems very slow, at least for the Windows platform.
All the products in this - admittedly niche - market appear to be some way from maturity. All lack some essential functions, necessitating a process of "cut and shut" to get different programmes to work together, compensating for each other's failings. The use of IdeaMason for fiction writing - a use for which it's possibly the best product around, but for which it's certainly not designed - must be one symptom of this.
It's encouraging that software developers are moving towards designing a more complete writing environment. However at the same time it's very frustrating. The ideal outlines (no pun intended) of such an environment are becoming clearer and clearer, yet progress towards them seems very slow, at least for the Windows platform.
All the products in this - admittedly niche - market appear to be some way from maturity. All lack some essential functions, necessitating a process of "cut and shut" to get different programmes to work together, compensating for each other's failings. The use of IdeaMason for fiction writing - a use for which it's possibly the best product around, but for which it's certainly not designed - must be one symptom of this.
Graham Smith
10/19/2006 11:45 am
Hugh
Why is IM better than Liquid Story Binder for fiction writing?
Graham
The use of IdeaMason for fiction writing - a use for which it's
possibly the best product around, but for which it's certainly not designed - must be
one symptom of this.
Why is IM better than Liquid Story Binder for fiction writing?
Graham
Hugh Pile
10/19/2006 2:01 pm
Graham Smith wrote:
Hugh
>The use of IdeaMason for fiction writing - a use for which it's
>possibly the
best product around, but for which it's certainly not designed - must be
>one symptom
of this.
Why is IM better than Liquid Story Binder for fiction writing?
Graham
Ha! ;>) I like elements of both (on limited acquaintance). However...
...I'm looking for an "outline of outlines", with some additional functions. Neither provides all of these.
LSB's greatest strengths in my view are its saving and backup facilities. Its greatest weakness is the absence of a strongly-functioned database in which to store all the bits and pieces which a fiction writer, just as much as a factual writer, inevitably accumulates. Effectively LSB has such a database, but it's rudimentary compared with what I'd like.
Another strength of LSB is its collection of tools for pre-composition (storyboards, outliners, timeliners and so on). But there's a slight sense of pell-mell development in the way they've been produced. Perhaps this is what Franz meant in an earlier post when he said that he didn't find LSB convincing.
I like LSB's working aids (word counts, a timer and so on), but I do miss the ability to be able to comment properly on what I've written when I'm revising. Lastly, I'd like the developer to use more colour in the UI. (This may not seem important, but it becomes so for me when sitting in front of the software for long periods.)
IM's greatest strengths in my view are balanced between its database ("portfolio") and its composition tool. IM also has a commenting function, reminders, a to-do list and a history pane. But by comparison with LSB, it lacks word-counts and timers, and - a big gap - has no back-up/auto-save facility (though as Franz highlighted this can be remedied). IM has more colour (though some of its icons are a bit overblown) and a slightly more solid feel than LSB. Of course, unlike LSB which is more or less self-contained, IM leans heavily on MS Word; that isn't an issue for me, but I can see that it might be for some.
So - swings and roundabouts! But decisively for me I really like the way IM enables me to to pull a block of text out of its database and slot it into my outline, as Franz described. For me this is fundamental to "the complete writing environment". Hence my thinking that, at least as far as their current versions go, IM is possibly better for fiction writing than LSB.
Graham Smith
10/19/2006 4:35 pm
Hugh
Thanks Hugh, that is an interesting and useful comparison.
I had just downloaded LSB and rather liked it, but your comments give me useful insights into evaluating it.
Graham
>Why is IM better than Liquid Story
Binder for fiction writing?
Ha! ;>) I like elements of both (on limited
acquaintance). However...
Thanks Hugh, that is an interesting and useful comparison.
I had just downloaded LSB and rather liked it, but your comments give me useful insights into evaluating it.
Graham
Hugh Pile
10/20/2006 1:02 pm
Graham Smith wrote:
Hugh
>>Why is IM better than Liquid Story
>Binder for fiction writing?
>Ha! ;>) I
like elements of both (on limited
>acquaintance). However...
Thanks Hugh, that
is an interesting and useful comparison.
I had just downloaded LSB and rather liked
it, but your comments give me useful insights into evaluating it.
Graham
Graham
I would be interested to hear what you think.
Hugh
Cassius
10/27/2006 6:38 am
While Idea Mason looks very interesting and the price appears quite reasonable, I suspect that many of us don't have the required software and maybe not the required hardware.
For example, it requires: Win XP; Microsoft Office® XP (2002) or later edition, or Microsoft Works® Suite 2002 or later edition; and a screen resolution of 1024x768 or higher resolution with 16-bit color.
Now, for many of us, the total cost is not so reasonable.
For example, it requires: Win XP; Microsoft Office® XP (2002) or later edition, or Microsoft Works® Suite 2002 or later edition; and a screen resolution of 1024x768 or higher resolution with 16-bit color.
Now, for many of us, the total cost is not so reasonable.
David Dunham
10/27/2006 3:08 pm
Many businesses replace hardware on a 3-4 year cycle, so requiring 4 year old software doesn't seem that terrible.
I confess my own Opal outliner requires a version of Mac OS X that's less than 2 years old, so I may be a little biased. My logic was that it was a lot easier writing robust software when you can rely on newer OS features, and that the bulk of sales, for me and other publishers, was to the latest release. That doesn't help the people who can't afford the upgrade, don't want to take the risk of changing what works perfectly well, or who'd need new hardware. (In my case I have a machine that doesn't have enough free disk space to upgrade.)
I confess my own Opal outliner requires a version of Mac OS X that's less than 2 years old, so I may be a little biased. My logic was that it was a lot easier writing robust software when you can rely on newer OS features, and that the bulk of sales, for me and other publishers, was to the latest release. That doesn't help the people who can't afford the upgrade, don't want to take the risk of changing what works perfectly well, or who'd need new hardware. (In my case I have a machine that doesn't have enough free disk space to upgrade.)
Franz Grieser
10/28/2006 12:46 pm
Cassius
Are you serious? At least in Germany, you would have had to try hard to find a Windows PC in the last 4-5 years that does not fit the requirements (including the need for Word).
Franz
While Idea Mason looks very interesting and the price appears quite reasonable, I
suspect that many of us don't have the required software and maybe not the required
hardware.
For example, it requires: Win XP; Microsoft Office® XP (2002) or later
edition, or Microsoft Works® Suite 2002 or later edition; and a screen resolution of
1024x768 or higher resolution with 16-bit color.
Are you serious? At least in Germany, you would have had to try hard to find a Windows PC in the last 4-5 years that does not fit the requirements (including the need for Word).
Franz
Dominik Holenstein
10/28/2006 2:16 pm
Version 3 of Idea Mason will allow to export the data to rtf - so you are not limited to Word anymore when you write a composition in IM.
Dominik
Dominik
Kenneth Rhee
10/28/2006 2:51 pm
Franz Grieser wrote:
Are you
serious? At least in Germany, you would have had to try hard to find a Windows PC in the
last 4-5 years that does not fit the requirements (including the need for Word).
Franz
Windows XP has been out since late 2001 (5 years old). In computing, that's ancient history. As far as I know even "slow" companies have 4 to 5 year PC replacement cycle (thus almost everyone would have upgraded from either NT or 2000, and most consumers I know use Windows XP Home right now. In fact, most consumer PC's come with MS Works preinstalled these days.
So, I don't see how this could be an obstacle for people to purchase software???
Graham Smith
10/29/2006 8:36 am
>Are you
>serious? At least in Germany, you would have had
to try hard to find a Windows PC in the
>last 4-5 years that does not fit the
requirements (including the need for Word).
Windows XP has been out
since late 2001 (5 years old). In computing, that's ancient history. As far as I know
even "slow" companies have 4 to 5 year PC replacement cycle (thus almost everyone
would have upgraded from either NT or 2000, and most consumers I know use Windows XP
Home right now. In fact, most consumer PC's come with MS Works preinstalled these
days.
So, I don't see how this could be an obstacle for people to purchase
software???
In the University I work in there are still a good proportion of academic staff running win2000, with a replacement policy that seems to be based on a "replace when broken" approach. If my department reflects the whole University then about 20% are running win2000. 12 months ago that would have been 80% running win2000. It certainly influenced my assessment of Idea Mason, when I first looked at it. Not so importnat now, as 3 out of the 6 PCs I use regularly now have XP installed.
I am certainly aware of many large businessses, home users and self employed consultants still running wIn2000 or even win98se, who see no particular reason to upgrade because the OS is still fulfilling the primary needs.
Having said that, I can understand why a company would choose not to support an old OS, but certainly in the UK, I see a high proportion of people who are not yet using XP.
Graham
Kenneth Rhee
10/29/2006 11:22 am
Graham Smith wrote:
In the University I
work in there are still a good proportion of academic staff running win2000, with a
replacement policy that seems to be based on a "replace when broken" approach. If my
department reflects the whole University then about 20% are running win2000. 12
months ago that would have been 80% running win2000. It certainly influenced my
assessment of Idea Mason, when I first looked at it. Not so importnat now, as 3 out of the
6 PCs I use regularly now have XP installed.
I am certainly aware of many large
businessses, home users and self employed consultants still running wIn2000 or even
win98se, who see no particular reason to upgrade because the OS is still fulfilling
the primary needs.
Having said that, I can understand why a company would choose not
to support an old OS, but certainly in the UK, I see a high proportion of people who are
not yet using XP.
Graham
Graham,
Interesting perspective from UK.
I do think it's only a matter of time (not long in my book) everyone is going to transition to Windows XP or Vista. MS stopped supporting Win 98 or ME in June 2006, and Windows 2000 service pack 5 was scrapped a few years ago, and is now in extended support. The licensing for Windows 2000 is not even available now so that any new PC will not have Windows 2000 installed. . .
Some of my programs I'm running every day don't even support Windows 98 right now. I did run Windows 2000 before, but XP is so much more stable and "convenient" when it comes to drivers that I can't see any good reason why anyone who can afford it does not want to upgrade . . .
Graham Smith
10/29/2006 11:58 am
Kenneth
I seem to approach this from the other direction, unless you know that XP will solve a specific problem I cannot see why anyone would want to upgrade.
Graham
I did run Windows 2000 before, but XP is so much more
stable and "convenient" when it comes to drivers that I can't see any good reason why
anyone who can afford it does not want to upgrade . . .
I seem to approach this from the other direction, unless you know that XP will solve a specific problem I cannot see why anyone would want to upgrade.
Graham
Kenneth Rhee
10/29/2006 12:26 pm
Graham Smith wrote:
I seem to approach this from the other
direction, unless you know that XP will solve a specific problem I cannot see why
anyone would want to upgrade.
Graham
Graham,
This is quite interesting indeed. I can only speak from my experience, but having used Windows XP (SP2) and Windows 2000 in the past and present, there is no way I would ever want to use Windows 2000 ever again . . . For me, ClearType, availability of drivers (or built-in drivers), stability (I used to get more BOD with Windows 2000 are a few reasons why I would prefer XP over 2000. However, as you suggested, everyone's mileage may vary, and people may not know the advantages unless they have experience in using XP.
This is not to suggest that XP is the best OS available out there. As a matter of fact, Vista is neither, but upgrading software/hardware seems to be a fact of life these days.
Graham Smith
10/29/2006 1:23 pm
Kenneth
I think this is one the problems when trying to derive any general concusions from personal experience.
I have been running XP on my Thinkpad for about 2.5 years, while running an almost identical set of programs on my desktop running WIN2000 for the same period. When not out and about, the Thinkpad sits in a docking station and shares a 19" Vewisonic monitor with the desktop, which has dual monitors.
I have had several annoying software problems with the Thinkpad ( the most money I have ever spent on a computer) and XP and not a single problem with my home built PC running WIN2000. I have never had a BOD with WIN2000, but the Thinkpad has had a whole series of driver issues, the USB ports have issues, the Windows update often fails, but has never failed on WIN2000, indeed a whole list issues.
Having said that, my previous home built PC running WIN98SE also worked flawlessly. It is only since I have had XP computers that I have started to have problems. I know this is unusual, and I have just been lucky, but that has been my experience.
Of course there could be many reasons for this, but my new University computer (XP of course) is also having problems. I am not in way suggesting that WIN2000 is better, but my personal experiences prevent me from getting enthusiastic about XP. Long term of course I will upgrade all my PCs to XP or even Vista, as I will have no choice, but I am in no rush.
This gave me purple fringing around closely spaced letters and I had to switch it off as it was annoying me so much
Everyone knows that is Linux :-)
Graham
This is quite interesting indeed. I can
only speak from my experience, but having used Windows XP (SP2) and Windows 2000 in the
past and present, there is no way I would ever want to use Windows 2000 ever again . . .
I think this is one the problems when trying to derive any general concusions from personal experience.
I have been running XP on my Thinkpad for about 2.5 years, while running an almost identical set of programs on my desktop running WIN2000 for the same period. When not out and about, the Thinkpad sits in a docking station and shares a 19" Vewisonic monitor with the desktop, which has dual monitors.
I have had several annoying software problems with the Thinkpad ( the most money I have ever spent on a computer) and XP and not a single problem with my home built PC running WIN2000. I have never had a BOD with WIN2000, but the Thinkpad has had a whole series of driver issues, the USB ports have issues, the Windows update often fails, but has never failed on WIN2000, indeed a whole list issues.
Having said that, my previous home built PC running WIN98SE also worked flawlessly. It is only since I have had XP computers that I have started to have problems. I know this is unusual, and I have just been lucky, but that has been my experience.
Of course there could be many reasons for this, but my new University computer (XP of course) is also having problems. I am not in way suggesting that WIN2000 is better, but my personal experiences prevent me from getting enthusiastic about XP. Long term of course I will upgrade all my PCs to XP or even Vista, as I will have no choice, but I am in no rush.
ClearType,
This gave me purple fringing around closely spaced letters and I had to switch it off as it was annoying me so much
This is not to suggest that XP is the best OS available out there.
Everyone knows that is Linux :-)
Graham
Kenneth Rhee
10/29/2006 2:33 pm
Graham Smith wrote:
This gave me purple
fringing around closely spaced letters and I had to switch it off as it was annoying me
so much
>This is not to suggest that XP is the best OS available out
there.
Everyone knows that is Linux :-)
Graham
Strange. Have you tried to tune ClearType? It's not apparent in the OS, but you can tune your ClearType to suit your preference. The symptom you describe is typically what people see first time you turn it one w/o tuning it.
I personally prefer the Mac, but stuck in the PC world.
Ken
Graham Smith
10/29/2006 2:41 pm
Ken
I did get some help with this problem and followed various bits of advice on fine tuning settings, none of which helped.
Indeed I annoyed some of my helpers who, havng had it brought to their attention realised they were suffering from the same problem, which they hadn't noticed, but now couldn't avoid seeing.
Graham
>This gave me purple
>fringing around closely spaced
letters and I had to switch it off as it was annoying me
>so much
Strange. Have you tried to tune ClearType? It's not apparent in
the OS, but you can tune your ClearType to suit your preference. The symptom you
describe is typically what people see first time you turn it one w/o tuning it.
I did get some help with this problem and followed various bits of advice on fine tuning settings, none of which helped.
Indeed I annoyed some of my helpers who, havng had it brought to their attention realised they were suffering from the same problem, which they hadn't noticed, but now couldn't avoid seeing.
Graham
Kenneth Rhee
10/29/2006 3:03 pm
Graham Smith wrote:
I did get some help with this problem and followed various
bits of advice on fine tuning settings, none of which helped.
Indeed I annoyed some
of my helpers who, havng had it brought to their attention realised they were
suffering from the same problem, which they hadn't noticed, but now couldn't avoid
seeing.
Graham
That's weird. I have no problem with my system (laptop running 1600x1200 with 32bit color).
I couldn't go w/o ClearType since it's make the screen so much more legible in my system.
Ken
1
2