Windows 10 - free upgrade to those with PC using Windows 7 or 8

[robko]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Yes, basic printers seem to work fine. It's the "smart" multifunction devices that need fancy drivers.

I have a Canon multi-function (print, fax, scan copy) that's 7-8 years old and I am impressed at how quickly Canon has updated the drivers over the years. Haven't had any issues with new OS's and they are updated to Win 10.

[Katsunami]

As far as I know, Windows Vista, 7, 8.x and 10 all use the same driver system for printers and scanners, as well as for many other types of devices. If so, older drivers may still work with Windows 10.

[kennyc]

My three year old Epson 845 just got clogged nozzles.... Due to low usage...wasted a whole set of ink trying to clear it. Bought a new brother inkjet J885DW....same functionality - all in one - half the size and a third the price....

[wodin]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

...
Even mouse drivers are like 75MB or thereabouts. Where are the days that mouse drivers came as a MOUSE.COM or MOUSE.SYS file, barely 20 kB large? ...

Ah, the simple days...

Those were the days when hardware interface drivers were written in assembly language.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by wodin

Those were the days when hardware interface drivers were written in assembly language.

Yes, the good ol' days!

[wodin]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes, the good ol' days!

Anyone who has ever written any code in assembly wouldn't have called it "simple". We had an adage in those days; assembly programmers are AWESOME!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by wodin

Anyone who has ever written any code in assembly wouldn't have called it "simple". We had an adage in those days; assembly programmers are AWESOME!

Yes we were!

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by wodin

Anyone who has ever written any code in assembly wouldn't have called it "simple". We had an adage in those days; assembly programmers are AWESOME!

In the PLC world, assembly (or at least, something like it) still exists, in the form of Instruction List. It's no fun to use, to be honest. I wonder why anyone would use it instead of Structured Text (a programming language based on Pascal).

This is somewhat off-topic, however.

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

In the PLC world, assembly (or at least, something like it) still exists, in the form of Instruction List. It's no fun to use, to be honest. I wonder why anyone would use it instead of Structured Text (a programming language based on Pascal).

This is somewhat off-topic, however.

The reason is, sometimes, quite easy although it looks like it's forgotten now: efficiency. Not in PLC world, but real time devices.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

The reason is, sometimes, quite easy although it looks like it's forgotten now: efficiency. Not in PLC world, but real time devices.

Excuse me, but is there still real time devices (new) that don't have a PLC controlling it?

Assembly language is not the lowest level either - otherwise you wouldn't need a compiler and disassembler for it to work.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Assembly language is not the lowest level either - otherwise you wouldn't need a compiler and disassembler for it to work.

Well, assembler, not compiler, technically I guess, and you don't need a disassembler for it to work, only for you to more easily work with it.
And as long as there is a 1 to 1 relationship between mnemonics and machine instructions, isn't it equally as low level as flipping switches?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

Well, assembler, not compiler, technically I guess, and you don't need a disassembler for it to work, only for you to more easily work with it.
And as long as there is a 1 to 1 relationship between mnemonics and machine instructions, isn't it equally as low level as flipping switches?

Yep, but assemblers save you the hassle of having to calculate offsets, etc, yourself. You can have:

label:
   ...
   ...
   goto label

type constructs. Particularly handy for negative offsets such as the above.

[wodin]

As I said "assembly programmers are AWESOME!"

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ApK

Well, assembler, not compiler, technically I guess, and you don't need a disassembler for it to work, only for you to more easily work with it.
And as long as there is a 1 to 1 relationship between mnemonics and machine instructions, isn't it equally as low level as flipping switches?

Well, not quite. It becomes very unreadable or understandable when using self changing code or jumping inbetween instructions. Still say it is a compiler - unless you don't consider higher level compilers to be still assembly language (e.g. Microsoft's macro assembler).

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Well, not quite. It becomes very unreadable or understandable

wait..as opposed to 'derstandable?'

when using self changing code

That was a HUGE no-no in my assembler classes in college!
I attribute the intentional use of self-modifying code to the realm of AI and other areas where one is unlikely to be writing in assembler.

Still say it is a compiler - unless you don't consider higher level compilers to be still assembly language (e.g. Microsoft's macro assembler).

Certainly one can add high-level features and blur the lines, but at the basic level to my mind (without actually looking up definitions) I have always thought of an assembler as doing that direct 1-to-1 substitution into the proper file formats, directly replacing mnemonics with instruction codes, labels with addresses, and that's pretty much it...it assembles the code you wrote directly into the machine format. The code you write is exactly the code that executes and that's it.
Leaving out high-level ease-of-use stuff like in MASM, any assembler for a system will always produce the same machine code from the same assembly code.

A compiler, on the other hand, takes in arbitrarily defined function names, flow control, logic and data structures and compiles the needed implementation, which the coder may never see or fully understand, and two compilers may generate totally different machine code from the same source code.

Any ways, fun stuff, and makes me long for the old days.

ApK