Bass Ackwards ... all too common

Tonight I again spent a number of hours with PBS. America at A Crossroads held my interest, for it spoke of the who/how/why/where/whatever of being an Islamic American. I wasn't glued to the tube, but I was listening with both ears. Nothing on the program made me feel endangered, and only a few things had the touch of "shame on us for thinking and acting that way" -- "us" being we who are not followers of Islam.

But the epiphany I experienced had little to do with Islam, and a lot to do with being American. Our one nation indivisible had once again been doing things a bit backwards, for perhaps the best of reasons, but wrong nonetheless.

When we speak of different ethnicities or belief systems, all American, we blindly follow the pattern that who knows whom started who knows when. First state the difference -- christian, jew, muslim or native, african, italian et cetera -- and only then add the "American" as almost an afterthought (or to avoid the appearance of divisiveness or bias).

I think that it is long past the time where American comes first and is placed first when we speak of individual differences and preferences. It would certainly be more accurate, since those we speak of generally are long standing or born-to-it Americans ... people who generally share the same hopes and support for our country.

Henceforth it is should be made a rule: American first! American Muslims, American Natives, American Africans, American Jews, American Irish, American Catholics, American Greeks, American Americans.

How much closer we would find ourselves, when each "difference" began with the one thing we all share: American

Think about it . . .

M-I-Ceeee R-O-essssssS Oh-Eff-Tee Vis-tah

Dear Microsoft:

I watched a short video about your latest "ain't Vista great?" presentation.
I thought about it, and I think I should let you know a few things ... since apparently no one else has bothered to say anything at all (or you haven't been listing).

First, when I install an operating system on my computer, I do it so my computer will operate, and my software will work on the operating system.
* I do not install an OS to watch sports.
* I do not install an OS to live stream full length movies.
* And I most certainly don't install an OS to give myself a big ANIGIF for my desktop.

I could, if I so desired, install a lesser version of Vista on the system I'm currently using. But if I did so, I would be reducing the effectiveness and speed of any software I currently use; I have finite resources on this system, and I don't need aspects of the OS eating up those resources before my software I need even loads. It is bad enough that simply loading XP means more than 256Meg of my 1Gig memory is hijacked; if I loaded Vista, and threw in a cutesy waterfall on the desktop, I'm certain I would have less than half my one Gigabyte of RAM left.

I believe in updating software when a better working version is available. I do not believe in having to replace my hardware to simply use a newer OS.

Thankfully, even new improved versions of Linux which come out will be able to run quite well on my current hardware.

Maybe I'm not the normal consumer; I've been know to keep my automobiles for ten or twenty (20) years when they are working well. I simply have never believed in planned obsolescence, and have always been angered by forced obsolescence. Maybe I simply appreciate the worth of "tried and true" things since I fall into that category myself and, at age 39 and counting to 65 this year, I've owned and used business and home computers from when a floppy was good for 320K and I didn't need a hard drive to run my bookkeeping business. At one job I actually had a system which used eight-inch (8.5?) truly floppy disks for both the operation and applications; data was stored in the form of print outs and "most recent values" only.

I'm not saying I'd want to go back to what I had before, even though DesqView on DOS worked wonderfully well and at speeds comparable to XP -- on a 386 vs. the now required Pentium-or-better. I was even able to run a full function COBOL on my little 386, and dial up to the mainframe for on-site testing of the software we were developing off-site.

I simply think that no one should need to upgrade hardware to run a new OS; it's stupid when most of the software being run won't be written for the new OS, and there will few differences in performance that are positive.

So, bottom line, please Mr. Gates and cohorts ... stop improving things! It would be so much nicer if you simply fixed the stuff we're currently using, and I don't mean once a month patches ... I mean FIX it!

Sincerely,

DOSosaur and future penguin