gdgt.com/discuss/gdgt-etiquette-question-rented-th...
What does everyone think about the placement of older desktop operating systems on one's have/had lists?
In my case, all of my computers are running Mac OS X Snow Leopard and/or Windows 7, but I have hard copies of earlier versions of both platforms lying around. While they're not in use, I do own them, but owning software on a disc seems different than owning say, a piece of hardware you no longer use. There's a certain physicality that is absent from owning old software that isn't installed anymore.
Thoughts?
Question about
Another gdgt etiquette question similar to Dave's regarding rented/employer-issued gadgets
top answers
community pick
Old uninstalled software goes onto my had lists, because, as you you said, it's on the disc but I couldn't go 'crack it open' so to speak and start using it like I could, say, an old pair of headphones.
mark as good answer
3 people like this answer
Clicking the mark as good answer button helps us highlight the best answers.
I would actually keep them on my have list, especially if it's something like a sealed copy of Windows 1.0. Seems like that's something bragging about!
mark as good answer
2 people like this answer
Yeah, I'm mixed on this. I do think it's perfectly legit to do. But for me, I am just not that motivated to catalog my old OS's.
Part of it might be that I just don't care about old OS's in the same way that I care about old gadgets -- things that I could tangibly hold, or play with. Yes, I do remember spending quality time with them and writing cheesy BASIC and Pascal programs for DOS. But they just don't hold me the same way.
I was looking at some people's had lists recently, and they listed every iteration of Windows and DOS on their had lists. It's cool to see, but maybe I'm not that OCD.
But hey, if you got it, flaunt it!
Part of it might be that I just don't care about old OS's in the same way that I care about old gadgets -- things that I could tangibly hold, or play with. Yes, I do remember spending quality time with them and writing cheesy BASIC and Pascal programs for DOS. But they just don't hold me the same way.
I was looking at some people's had lists recently, and they listed every iteration of Windows and DOS on their had lists. It's cool to see, but maybe I'm not that OCD.
But hey, if you got it, flaunt it!
mark as good answer
2 people like this answer
I just joined the site, so not sure what everyone does, but I would say anything that you either use should be under have and anything you don't use anymore under had.
mark as good answer
0 people like this answer
I have (still, after a major clear-out) stuffed cabinets with licenses for Windows 98 and beyond (yes, even Me in various languages) and Office 2000 onwards. They don't feature of my Have list.
mark as good answer
0 people like this answer
id put it on my had list! after all is it not just meant to connect people with questions to the people with answers, and it would stand to reason if you used to have it you may be able to answer questions about it! of course if its a copy of win 98 i would imagine most people will assume its a had regardless of where you add it to!
mark as good answer
0 people like this answer
follow this question
share:
Related questions
6 users following this question:
This question has been viewed 447 times.
Last activity .
Tips for giving the best answers
Sometimes it's just little details that separates a great and not so great answer! Here are a few simple tips to keep in mind:
- 1
- Be complete and thorough. Don't skimp on the details!
- 2
- Try not to answer with a question. Because that's not really an answer, right?
- 3
- A little research goes a long way. Back up your claims and assumptions!
- 4
- Try to be patient, tech questions can be complicated.
- 5
- You are awesome for both reading this and answering questions.