Eibert wrote:

>
> Hey
>
> I got a problem with my laptop which vista runs on.
>
> It just keeps freezing and rebooting mostly when i thouch or pick it
> up. Sometimes i also get a BSOD with diffrent code.
>
> If i just start te laptop it sometimes freeze druing the boot and i
> have to reboot it when i got i booted to vista and dont touch it and
> just let it run the laptop works but as soon as i thouch the thing it
> crashes.
>
> I already did a memtest and scanned my harddrive with HD tune.

Since the errors are various, in all probability you have hardware failure.
Since this is a laptop, the only end-user replaceable items are the RAM and
the hard drive. You've already tested the RAM. I don't believe HD Tune is
as thorough as using a diagnostic utility from the hard drive mftr. because
HD Tune runs in Windows. I would test the hard drive with that utility (or
use Seagate's SeaTools For DOS) instead. If both the RAM and hard drive
test good, you have other problems.

You can also try booting with a Linux Live CD such as Knoppix. If the
computer behaves perfectly under Linux, then you know that Windows is at
fault. If the problems occur in Linux, you know the hardware is at fault.


Malke
--
MS-MVP
Elephant Boy Computers - Don't Panic!
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/#FAQ

On 6 Feb., 16:03, Malke <ma...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Eibert wrote:
>
> > Hey
>
> > I got a problem with my laptop whichvistaruns on.
>
> > It just keeps freezing and rebooting mostly when i thouch or pick it
> > up. Sometimes i also get a BSOD with diffrent code.
>
> > If i just start te laptop it sometimes freeze druing the boot and i
> > have to reboot it when i got i booted tovistaand dont touch it and
> > just let it run the laptop works but as soon as i thouch the thing it
> > crashes.
>
> > I already did a memtest and scanned my harddrive with HD tune.
>
> Since the errors are various, in all probability you have hardware failure.
> Since this is a laptop, the only end-user replaceable items are the RAM and
> the hard drive. You've already tested the RAM. I don't believe HD Tune is
> as thorough as using a diagnostic utility from the hard drive mftr. because
> HD Tune runs in Windows. I would test the hard drive with that utility (or
> use Seagate's SeaTools For DOS) instead. If both the RAM and hard drive
> test good, you have otherproblems.
>
> You can also try booting with a Linux Live CD such as Knoppix. If the
> computer behaves perfectly under Linux, then you know that Windows is at
> fault. If theproblemsoccur in Linux, you know the hardware is at fault.
>
> Malke
> --
> MS-MVP
> Elephant Boy Computers - Don't Panic!http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/#FAQ

The Vista SOFTWARE errors are defined as "intermittent". You never
know what to expect, but cannot blame all the hardware on Earth.

I have a lot of experience of the many, many bugs of Vista and the
various machines that run it.

Mary Jo Foley is an excellent Microsoft "spotter". Here is her home
page:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/

She says in one of her blogs that Microsoft are anxious to avoid the
"disinformation on the Internet", but are THEMSELVES the source of
that disinformation.
Their "updates" are supposed to meet the special wishes of the
customers. However, I found 42 separate "knowledge bases" (KB) on the
Microsoft site, all aimed at patching some of Microsoft's dud code.
The special wishes of the customers are simply for a system that
WORKS.

Using System Function 66, Subfunction 2, my own machine-code program
for antialiased line-drawing found the file size. There is no other
way. The file-size was wrong. I took a commercial graphics program to
determine the filesize of a BMP file, and it reported that it was
MINUS one BILLION, 285 MILLION, 230 THOUSAND and 262 BYTES. Vista LIED
to the commercial software and to mine.

This shows that the bugs are deep in the BIOS of the Vista operating
system. It is rotten to the CORE.

There is a mathematical concept known as "die Mengenlehre" in German,
translated as "Set Theory" into English. However, it is not theory.

An operating system consists of a huge "set" of subroutines. In Vista,
many are broken. The only solution is to find a "subset" of those
routines, that are NOT broken. Any patch must use the safe subset. You
cannot write massive programs, that rely on the full set - broken and
unbroken - to repair the system.

On the Microsoft site, they offer "Service Pack 1". This takes a
massive 455 megabytes - enough space to contain perhaps ten complete
operating systems. Not only that, it does not load. So it is all in
vain.

Similarly with the "Knowledge Bases". The various KB-numbers for the
"updates" contain such things as an "update that enables future
updates". So Microsoft have discovered that their "updates" do not
work. They should have noticed that BEFORE they launched 42 of them on
the Internet, not AFTER. Indeed, they should TEST their "products".
They should have tested Vista. They should have tested the "updates".
They should test everything.

They are obviously unaware, by analogy, that you cannot use a car
without an engine to drive off to fetch an engine. You cannot use a
car without fuel to drive off to fetch fuel. There is a "set" of vital
parts, like engine and fuel that make the driving possible.

So the "update to enable updates" cannot be an "update". Like Lord
Russell's "set of all sets", which is a "superset", so an "update to
enable updates" has to be a "super-update" that uses only safe
subroutines.

These things announce themselves as "standalone programs". However,
Microsoft has grown so accustomed to writing programs that run UNDER
an operating system that they have lost the plot. An "update" that
runs under a buggy BIOS is not "standalone". Ergo, it is not a "super-
update".

Part of the disinformation Mary-Jo Foley speaks of relates to who's to
BLAME. Here we see the official Microsoft blame-shifting:

http://gizmodo.com/373076/nvidia-res...rashes-in-2007

It is an invidious slander of NVIDIA to say that they are RESPONSIBLE
for 28.8% of all crashes. Just because 28.8% of all video cards are
NVIDIA does not prove that they are GUILTY of the Vista crashes. ONE
HUNDRED PERCENT of all machines showing Vista crashes were running
Vista.

My own experience of Vista on several Dells, each with an NVIDIA card
is that they did indeed crash. However, there was no evidence of a
VIDEO crash.

THE FIRST THING TO DO IS TO DISABLE THE UPDATES.

Several machines I was trying were crashing out of regular programs to
"configure updates". All data that had been entered was lost. They
always hung for a time saying "section 2 of 3, 28% completed" and then
"section 3 of 3, 98% completed". They even claimed to be fetching
"updates" when there was no way whatever that the machine could
contact the Internet. It was totally OFF-LINE.

One of the KB "updates" is said to address an irregularity in the
handling of the "servicing store", which interferes with the
installation of "updates", "Service Packs" and programs.

I take it that the "servicing store" is the modem buffer, with the
pointer set to a special place where the "servicing" data will be
stored. Anyway, if it is not on the Internet it is taking RANDOM BYTES
from the "servicing store" and scattering them around the operating
system. In this way, the number of broken subroutines INCREASES
instead of being reduced.

So the automatic updating system, being flawed, acts as a "Trojan
virus". The original bugs cause the system to corrupt itself further.

The closest I came to a useable operating system was what I got when I
disabled the automatic updates.

However. And here is the joke. For FIVE DAYS after I disabled the
automatic updates, it continued to pretend that it was fetching
updates. Only after five days did it notice. Thereafter, it keeps
sneaking a window into my line-of-sight encouraging me to switch them
back on, or download "updates" manually.

I downloaded many "updates" using XP, into an SD card. I virus-checked
them and tried to run them. NONE WORKED.

So much for Microsoft and its world monopoly of IBM-compatible
systems.

Charles Douglas Wehner

Charles Douglas Wehner wrote:


> The Vista SOFTWARE errors are defined as "intermittent". You never
> know what to expect, but cannot blame all the hardware on Earth.

(snip rant)

Are you the original poster? If not and you have actual issues about which
you would like focused help then please make a new post with all pertinent
information.

Otherwise, your rant shows that you don't know what you're talking about.
While I don't particularly care for Vista as an operating system, it is
stable on good hardware. I have no problems with any of my Vista systems
nor do my clients. If you are having a lot of difficulties, you're doing
something wrong. If you just want to rant, you're in the wrong venue. Try a
different newsgroup or create a blog.

Malke
--
MS-MVP
Elephant Boy Computers - Don't Panic!
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/#FAQ

On 7 Feb., 04:38, Malke <ma...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Charles Douglas Wehnerwrote:
> > The Vista SOFTWARE errors are defined as "intermittent". You never
> > know what to expect, but cannot blame all the hardware on Earth.
>
> (snip rant)
>
> Are you the original poster? If not and you have actual issues about which
> you would like focused help then please make a new post with all pertinent
> information.
>
> Otherwise, your rant shows that you don't know what you're talking about.
> While I don't particularly care for Vista as an operating system, it is
> stable on good hardware. I have no problems with any of my Vista systems
> nor do my clients. If you are having a lot of difficulties, you're doing
> something wrong. If you just want to rant, you're in the wrong venue. Trya
> different newsgroup or create a blog.
>
> Malke
> --
> MS-MVP
> Elephant Boy Computers - Don't Panic!http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/#FAQ

Eric Schmidt of Google said that the Internet is a cesspool, a
festering sea of false information:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/google...sspool_brands/

High on the list of those who spread this false information are the
"Anoraks", the Internet graffittists, who are only showing off.

Malke is one of these.

Flame wars are not appropriate on such a thread as this. To describe
my accurate report as a "rant" shows that it is all way above his
head.

I am accused of "doing something wrong". He does not say what. After
FORTY-SIX YEARS in the computer industry, I have learnt to be
circumspect. I quote chapter and verse. I quote others who made the
same observations. Here is Chris Crum, on why the White House won't
use Vista:

http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...use-technology

Note the words: "If you haven't noticed, most people still prefer XP
over Microsoft's clunky, buggy, annoying new Vista. "

CLUNKY, BUGGY, ANNOYING.

I am not alone in being annoyed. NVIDIA must be annoyed at the
slander. So must Dell. A new Samsung laptop crashed so often that I
took it back to the shop. A new Asus was just as bad. A very large
number of Dell machines in Internet cafés crashed - but never the
NVIDIA card.

On the Asus, whenever I switched on, it would announce that it was
"configuring updates" although totally offline. It would then crash.
Sometimes, it switched itself off. Sometimes it rebooted. It was much
as Eibert reported.

The Anorak is a complete numbskull if he imagines that he can accuse
me of doing something wrong. It was a NEW machine. Nothing had been
installed. I SWITCHED ON. I did no more than that. I never got any
further. His malicious inuendo is part of that "cesspool of false
information".

I got the Asus running by disabling "updates".

After five days, it stopped corrupting itself.

I started work on my project, using my own machine-code programs that
worked perfectly on Windows 98, 2000 and XP. Mostly, they worked.
However, this "ANNOYING" (Chris Crum) operating system would almost
always crash after they had run. I had to open up a window and work my
way back to the directory after each run. However, suddenly even my
own program malfunctioned.

I was not doing anything wrong. Indeed, I had the source code of my
programs. So when commercial software that I had not written reported
"MINUS one BILLION, 285 MILLION, 230 THOUSAND and 262 BYTES" for a
file-size, I was able to trace this fault right into the Vista Bios at
function 66, subfunction 2.

I have a collection of screen-shots showing about thirty variants on
the Vista crashes, including the "PALE SCREEN OF DEATH". Sometimes,
the image becomes more and more feint. However, before it has faded to
white it hangs. Fading to white is a very CPU-intensive process. I
presume the "PALE SCREEN" crash is due to buffer over-run.

Vista Victims should not blame themselves, no matter what malicious
Anoraks say. Nor should they blame the hardware manufacturers. My
experience is both in hardware and software design. I give top marks
to all those manufacturers involved - to NVIDIA, to Dell, to Samsung,
to Asus. I give top marks to the various software makers OTHER THAN
Microsoft. Pity about the operating system. It louses up the work of
engineers and software authors throughout the world.

CHECK WHETHER YOUR MACHINE "CONFIGURES" UPDATES WHEN COMPLETELY
OFFLINE. If so, it is a BUG.

DISABLE THOSE UPDATES.

Try again. It will halfway work.

Incidentally, in order to write CGI scripts, one needs to create a
"COMMON GATEWAY INTERFACE". This is done by installing a SERVER. After
that, one can use http://www.localhost to get through to your CGI-BIN
directory.

Out of the box, Vista never enlarged the DOS window (now called Input
Prompt). You click on the "maximise" button, and the window springs to
the top left of the screen without changing size. The "ground glass"
border turns black.

I did not intend to install, but simply to RUN the Xitami server on
the Asus with Vista. It hung up. However, when I went to "maximise",
the window sprang to the left of the screen and expanded to about 64
rows of text instead of 25. The Xitami server had "repaired" a bug in
Vista! I now knew what it was meant to do.

However, when running Edit, or similar software, the window springs to
a smaller size - about 48 rows.

After the Xitami adventure, I find that I can now minimise and
maximise at will. It is crazy. Xitami is a server, not a repair tool.

The only snag is that if one starts Edit, the window will not change
size. One has to have a BLACK DOS screen if one wants to maximise.
After that one can start Edit and get a blue, 48-row screen.

So in conclusion, I can report that you must DISABLE THE UPDATES.

I can also report that there are the most bizarre of happening with
this buggy, clunky, annoying system. Sometimes, as with Xitami, even a
minor self-repair.

I can also report that the KB "updates" DON'T WORK.

Microsoft have to get busy sorting out a worldwide problem they have
created.

Charles Douglas Wehner

"Charles Douglas Wehner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:b76e9699-0fb8-4e2c-890b-(E-Mail Removed)...
On 7 Feb., 04:38, Malke <ma...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Charles Douglas Wehnerwrote:
> > The Vista SOFTWARE errors are defined as "intermittent". You never
> > know what to expect, but cannot blame all the hardware on Earth.
>
> (snip rant)
>
> Are you the original poster? If not and you have actual issues about which
> you would like focused help then please make a new post with all pertinent
> information.
>
> Otherwise, your rant shows that you don't know what you're talking about.
> While I don't particularly care for Vista as an operating system, it is
> stable on good hardware. I have no problems with any of my Vista systems
> nor do my clients. If you are having a lot of difficulties, you're doing
> something wrong. If you just want to rant, you're in the wrong venue. Try
> a
> different newsgroup or create a blog.
>
> Malke
> --
> MS-MVP
> Elephant Boy Computers - Don't
> Panic!http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/#FAQ

Eric Schmidt of Google said that the Internet is a cesspool, a
festering sea of false information:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/google...sspool_brands/

High on the list of those who spread this false information are the
"Anoraks", the Internet graffittists, who are only showing off.

Malke is one of these.

Flame wars are not appropriate on such a thread as this. To describe
my accurate report as a "rant" shows that it is all way above his
head.

I am accused of "doing something wrong". He does not say what. After
FORTY-SIX YEARS in the computer industry, I have learnt to be
circumspect. I quote chapter and verse. I quote others who made the
same observations. Here is Chris Crum, on why the White House won't
use Vista:

http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/20...use-technology

Note the words: "If you haven't noticed, most people still prefer XP
over Microsoft's clunky, buggy, annoying new Vista. "

CLUNKY, BUGGY, ANNOYING.

I am not alone in being annoyed. NVIDIA must be annoyed at the
slander. So must Dell. A new Samsung laptop crashed so often that I
took it back to the shop. A new Asus was just as bad. A very large
number of Dell machines in Internet cafés crashed - but never the
NVIDIA card.

On the Asus, whenever I switched on, it would announce that it was
"configuring updates" although totally offline. It would then crash.
Sometimes, it switched itself off. Sometimes it rebooted. It was much
as Eibert reported.

The Anorak is a complete numbskull if he imagines that he can accuse
me of doing something wrong. It was a NEW machine. Nothing had been
installed. I SWITCHED ON. I did no more than that. I never got any
further. His malicious inuendo is part of that "cesspool of false
information".

I got the Asus running by disabling "updates".

After five days, it stopped corrupting itself.

I started work on my project, using my own machine-code programs that
worked perfectly on Windows 98, 2000 and XP. Mostly, they worked.
However, this "ANNOYING" (Chris Crum) operating system would almost
always crash after they had run. I had to open up a window and work my
way back to the directory after each run. However, suddenly even my
own program malfunctioned.

I was not doing anything wrong. Indeed, I had the source code of my
programs. So when commercial software that I had not written reported
"MINUS one BILLION, 285 MILLION, 230 THOUSAND and 262 BYTES" for a
file-size, I was able to trace this fault right into the Vista Bios at
function 66, subfunction 2.

I have a collection of screen-shots showing about thirty variants on
the Vista crashes, including the "PALE SCREEN OF DEATH". Sometimes,
the image becomes more and more feint. However, before it has faded to
white it hangs. Fading to white is a very CPU-intensive process. I
presume the "PALE SCREEN" crash is due to buffer over-run.

Vista Victims should not blame themselves, no matter what malicious
Anoraks say. Nor should they blame the hardware manufacturers. My
experience is both in hardware and software design. I give top marks
to all those manufacturers involved - to NVIDIA, to Dell, to Samsung,
to Asus. I give top marks to the various software makers OTHER THAN
Microsoft. Pity about the operating system. It louses up the work of
engineers and software authors throughout the world.

CHECK WHETHER YOUR MACHINE "CONFIGURES" UPDATES WHEN COMPLETELY
OFFLINE. If so, it is a BUG.

DISABLE THOSE UPDATES.

Try again. It will halfway work.

Incidentally, in order to write CGI scripts, one needs to create a
"COMMON GATEWAY INTERFACE". This is done by installing a SERVER. After
that, one can use http://www.localhost to get through to your CGI-BIN
directory.

Out of the box, Vista never enlarged the DOS window (now called Input
Prompt). You click on the "maximise" button, and the window springs to
the top left of the screen without changing size. The "ground glass"
border turns black.

I did not intend to install, but simply to RUN the Xitami server on
the Asus with Vista. It hung up. However, when I went to "maximise",
the window sprang to the left of the screen and expanded to about 64
rows of text instead of 25. The Xitami server had "repaired" a bug in
Vista! I now knew what it was meant to do.

However, when running Edit, or similar software, the window springs to
a smaller size - about 48 rows.

After the Xitami adventure, I find that I can now minimise and
maximise at will. It is crazy. Xitami is a server, not a repair tool.

The only snag is that if one starts Edit, the window will not change
size. One has to have a BLACK DOS screen if one wants to maximise.
After that one can start Edit and get a blue, 48-row screen.

So in conclusion, I can report that you must DISABLE THE UPDATES.

I can also report that there are the most bizarre of happening with
this buggy, clunky, annoying system. Sometimes, as with Xitami, even a
minor self-repair.

I can also report that the KB "updates" DON'T WORK.

Microsoft have to get busy sorting out a worldwide problem they have
created.

Charles Douglas Wehner


After 46 years, you should have learned to be more concise..

If Vista was as bad a you say it is, it wouldn't have worked for anybody..

But it did and still does..

You need to find yourself a good local technician..

--
Mike Hall - MVP

Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

>You need to find yourself a good local technician..

And you need to find a news reader that can handle proper quoting.

On 8 Feb., 01:20, Mike Torello <torel...@chicoplt.com> wrote:
> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:
>
> >You need to find yourself a good local technician..
>
> And you need to find a news reader that can handle proper quoting.

Yes, the graffittists are at work, giving disinformation.

Most Vista systems work with the built-in games. Nothing more than
that. Even games players have been crying out on the Internet for help
with installing software. However, they are not to blame. It is the
"Wizard" that does the installing. They do not need the advice of
Anoraks. They need a stable operating system.

The "clunkiness" mentioned by Chris Crum of WebProNews relates amongst
other things to things happening as if one had pressed the input key,
although one has not. Suddenly, the machine does something that the
user has not instructed it to do.

The original complaint by Eibert was: "It just keeps freezing and
rebooting mostly when i touch or pick it up."

Yes, it is over-sensitive. It is over-sensitive regardless of the
individual unit, and regardless of the manufacturer. This is therefore
not a dry joint on the circuit-board, which is a common cause of
intermittent faults. It is the operating system.

Out of the box, it will not maximise the DOS window. As I said, I
tried Xitami and it "repaired" that fault, so I now can maximise the
window. However, one cannot recommend to every user that they try (and
fail) to run a specific server, just to "repair" a fault.

Out of the box, when simply switching on, it "configured updates" and
crashed. I disabled updates, and it is more stable.

Here is one example, out of many thousands. Also, one has the "Anorak"
commentary, which does not help the victim:

http://www.howtofixcomputers.com/for...es-104134.html

The Ubuntu advice is good. That is a version of LINUX - a stable
public-domain operating system. Using that, the victim can at least
access the disk and rescue files. These crashes on Vista happen so
suddenly that one cannot always back-up the files. I find that I am
backing up every few seconds, because with Vista one does not know
what is coming next. However, having to do so is very distracting.

Beware of the spam e-mails offering a "Microsoft Critical Patch". This
is a virus. Virus-writers have discovered how buggy Microsoft systems
are, and masquerade as genuine Microsoft sources.

I tried to get through to the Microsoft website, to show the list of
non-functioning "Updates to enable updates". However, on the Microsoft
site, once a Microsoft pop-up window appears, one cannot get rid of
it. So I cannot show you the list. There are at least 42 attempts by
Microsoft to repair their system over the WWW, all of them failures.

There are even shops on the Web that SELL these non-functioning
updates that are free from Microsoft. Avoid them.

Charles Douglas Wehner

"Charles Douglas Wehner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:1de44546-4864-49dc-b845->
> Yes, the graffittists are at work, giving disinformation.
>
> Most Vista systems work with the built-in games. Nothing more than
> that. Even games players have been crying out on the Internet for help
> with installing software. However, they are not to blame.

Snip

> The original complaint by Eibert was: "It just keeps freezing and
> rebooting mostly when i touch or pick it up."
>
> Yes, it is over-sensitive. It is over-sensitive regardless of the
> individual unit, and regardless of the manufacturer. This is therefore
> not a dry joint on the circuit-board, which is a common cause of
> intermittent faults. It is the operating system.
>

Snip

> Beware of the spam e-mails offering a "Microsoft Critical Patch". This
> is a virus. Virus-writers have discovered how buggy Microsoft systems
> are, and masquerade as genuine Microsoft sources.
>
> I tried to get through to the Microsoft website, to show the list of
> non-functioning "Updates to enable updates". However, on the Microsoft
> site, once a Microsoft pop-up window appears, one cannot get rid of
> it. So I cannot show you the list. There are at least 42 attempts by
> Microsoft to repair their system over the WWW, all of them failures.
>
> There are even shops on the Web that SELL these non-functioning
> updates that are free from Microsoft. Avoid them.
>
> Charles Douglas Wehner


So how do you explain that fact that big games do run on Vista. I have AoE
III, CFS 3, Halo, and Fable on my computer for the kids, and Zoo Tycoon II
for my grand daughter because she likes to see the animals walk about.

While some laptops are not well enough specified to handle Vista, freezing
and rebooting is if touched down to poor internal construction or
manufacturing faults.

E-mails purporting to be from MS is not a fault of MS and, if you hadn't
noticed, updates are a feature of all operating systems.

Some OEM builds are not good and may not take updates well. So blame the
OEMs for it

--
Mike Hall - MVP

Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Hi, Chuck.

The bottom line is:

Malke helps people.

You don't.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(E-Mail Removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail 2009 in Win7 Ultimate x64 7000)

"Charles Douglas Wehner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:b8784763-e7e9-447d-91a6-(E-Mail Removed)...

<BIG SNIP>

The graffitti children are still at work. They play GAMES, and think
they are geniuses.

Even negative advice from me is helpfull advice. It stops people
wasting their time doing tests that I have done already.

SWITCH OFF THE UPDATES. They corrupt the system. The proof is that
updates are "configured" from the Internet even when the machine if
off line.

DO NOT USE THE UPDATES. They do not work. They have "updates to enable
future updates". Because they are updates, they only work on a machine
that is already repaired.

Further advice: an old Xitami server may enable the DOS window to
maximise, as it did with me. A server is not a repair tool, yet this
one does cause a minor repair.

Further advice: There is nothing wrong with the hardware of all the
computer manufacturers on Earth. Asus, Dell, NVIDIA, Samsung and the
rest are not guilty, no matter what Microsoft may say. The KEYBOARD
debounce, and the MOUSE debounce are set too short. This makes the
system "twitchy". It behaves as if it had a dry joint - on ALL
platforms.

The showoffs consider that their malice is "help". It is not. It is
uninformed twaddle.

I can report that the bugs go right through to system level, as proven
by my experience with Function 66. I can report that the White House
rejects Vista. I can report the Mary Jo Foley and Chris Crum both
condemned the system as annoying. I can report that it affects the 32-
bit system, the 64-bit system and the XP "upgrade".

Only yesterday I was talking to another expert. I wanted to know the
details of Apple, because I am thinking of deserting Microsoft systems
completely. He confirmed that Apple is stable, with a Unix-based core.
He suggested that I buy a computer with Vista, and ask the shop
specifically to "DOWNgrade" it to XP. I had not solicited this advice,
but if you are buying a new computer, it is good advice.

Just typing "Vista Updates" into Google shows a list of at least
120,000 pages. Examining many of those pages reveals that vast numbers
of people are discussing "Vista problems".

"Vista Problems" can be used as a search-string, too.

Vista problems are real.

The opinions of the Anoraks are not.

Charles Douglas Wehner