The Indians I have met from Redmond who are PMs are exceptionally bright and
I would only make that kind of assessment if I were a developer and knew
anything about development communities. One of the great sources of
frustration to me is that since I'm not a developer, I have a ton of ideas
for what should go where, how, when and what the Windows OS is doing that it
doesn't--and if I were a top notch developer I feel I would have more
empathy for it being dooable. I've seen allt he song and dance about time
constraints, and resources and yadayada but almost twelve years was enough
time to fix Device Manager and Six Years was enough to get this particular
feature dond--backup being normal instead of the way that the team who did
it chose to dumb it down. I don't know if File Core Services was
responsible for dumming it down because as Jill says, they're savvy at
Redmond and we're dumb as a rock, but I am going to make a guess it was the
team who did this to backup. Possibly they have the backup team named
something else non-intuitive 'cause nonintuitve from what I've watched on
the windows menus over the years is in at Redmond.
I haven't figured out why the Shell team made all programs so it doesn't
expand any more or didn't leave any options to do that. I'll have to try
to reghack that. That was another bug they completely ignored.
The shell team blogs at
http://shellrevealed.com/
and they have some cuties like the Background on Backgrounds
http://shellrevealed.com/blogs/shellblog/archive/2006/10/28/The-Background-on-Backgrounds.aspx
and I keep looking for the Background on Backgrounds on Backgrounds on
Backgrounds on Backgrounds
and then it could be these guys
http://blogs.msdn.com/PowerShell
who refused to let the All Programs menu retain the option to exapnd.
You might be able to link the blootooth problem during the seminal momemnt
when that team full of chemistry, Bill Gates and Queen Latifah who did the
MCE 2005 Launch because of Queen Latifah's great Windoz skills, had a moment
when the Queen turned to Bill and said "Hey Bill can you get me one of
these?"
MFST has an aversion to anything that remotely they can link with DRM
because they want to make sure you get DRM scerwed anorgasmically of course.
They give as an excuse that MCE has never been allowed to join a domain even
thought it has a number of XP Pro elements and now I supposed Vista Pro or
Vista Amatuer or whoops I forgot Jill Zoeller says I have "Vista not Savvy
Novice Dumbass." I like that name for my edition. VNSNDA yep.
The prime reason that MCE (which is still a fraction of pcs on the planet
though sales jumped 40% with MCE 2005 and Bill Gates said and I quote "it
would change the face of computing") can't join a domain is all about DRM
protection in fact. That is precisely why they elected to do it.
But hey, this is the company who just released Zune so that it doesn't
support Windows Vista which I also heard by the grapevine they happened to
release right about the time of Zune and they also came up with their own
propitiary new music platform which of course is not WMP--you remember
Windows Media Player 11 don't you, that's the team Zach Robertson is
on--they have that in Vista and for XP but Zune does not support it. Then
if you really remember you remember MSFT came out with Plays for Sure.
Let's look at how they screwed people on Plays for Sure with ole Zune which
I renamed Ipod/Nano's Best Friend from MSFT. It's going to do wonders for
Ipod sales.
Protected WMA songs bought in online stores other than the Zune store—those
"PlaysForSure" DRM songs—won't play on Zune. Zune is not a PlaysForSure
device . The Zune devices works with the Zune software, not with Windows
Media Player or Napster or iTunes or anything else. MSFT wants as always to
have complete control of the Zune experience, not shudder the non-savvy
dumbass customers.
If Zune were PFS compatible and worked with Media Player 11, it would also
work with Napster and MusicMatch and if a customer used MusicMatch with
their Zune, then Microsoft would not be in charge of
changes/updates/improvements to that customer's PC software.
You don't though MSFT doesn't showcase this have to be a Zune owner to
download Zune software and that's here, but again talk about Nuts to the
64th degree--ole Zune doesn't install on ole Vista. LOL Psst Zunesters psst
J Allard can you name the new RTM'd OS that Jim Allchin your homeboy is
blogging exhuberantly about that you didn't allow Zune to install on? WOW
on WOW. I know it will at some public Vista launch on Jan 30 but in my
country Vista is coming into stores in 6 days.
http://www.zune.net/en-us/meetzune/software.htm
If MSFT starts offering points instead of money for doing wireless sharing,
well, I never ever underestimate the Redmond campus's ability to take
goofey to new levels.
One wonders what those Zune focus groups in Seattle outside Redmond were
smoking.
Popular video formats like MPEG-4 (simple profile and H.264) and DivX/XviD.
Videos on a Zune look like hell viewed on a TV using Home A/V Pack accessory
or an Xbox 360 to view the videos on your Zune on a TV.
I am the poster child for Vista Not Savvy Novice Dumbass. I just wrote that
on my pc with a magic marker in gothic letters.
CH
Bush administration ( big chickens who never served in the armed forces and
whose kids don't go near serving who have set up a system where the kids and
people up throught grandmothers and grandfathers some serving their fifty
tour who get killed are predominantly blacks and Hispanics from small towns
accross the US--other countrys buying into the wasteful chaos and financial
hemorrhage too) is said to be secretly negotiating with Suni gorilla groups
to get out of FIASCO IRAQ, now that the focus ahas tuyrned on the fact that
none of the talking heads on TV in America ever served in any capacity in
the Armed forces with the exception of the Generals who are singing like a
flipped snitch but kept silent while they had a chance to actually do
anything about the fiasco or the disastrous Bremmer and Rumsfield and
Cheney. It won't stop the civil war that is now raging in Iran controlled
Iraq.
Yury Averkiev said:
That's a good article. Well I guess it's too late to scream about it, may
be in the next Windows version, around year 2010 they will include the
individual files/folders backup feature in the wizard.
I think Microsoft should stop investing millions of dollars in the Indian
developers, who are not so bright developers as they claim.
And in addition to all the troubles MS managed to broke Bluetooth headsets
support in the RTM build. oh well...
Chad Harris said:
Yury--
I don't know *why they did this. I think that they were sitting around
in the Longhorn Saloon tossing back a few too many shooters when they
made the backup and also this is very indicative of an attitude that I
have been able to ID at Redmond in the last two years that has always
been prevelant--contempt of MSFT at Redmond for their core customers they
perceive as really consummately stupid people who aren't discerning and
will accept anything. I think they look at the apathy in their own
country the US of people towards hemorrhage of money and lives and see
that since they don't respond at all except to shop, they figure they can
slap anything together and it won't be noticed. Here's exhibit "A" of
that from Jill Zoller [MSFT Redmond] from Jill's blog or is it blogue or
blahog:
http://blogs.technet.com/filecab/pages/file-backup-in-windows-vista-faq.aspx
Monday, November 06, 2006 5:30 PM by cfsbloggers
File Backup in Windows Vista FAQ
From Ms. Jill Z:
"The new File Backup is too simple. Why didn’t you add more features,
such as location-based backup?
The file backup feature in Windows Vista is targeted at the core consumer
audience. To savvy users, it will appear quite simple, probably too
simple for you to use. For most consumers, however, it will hopefully be
the right balance of complexity and functionality to get them backing up
their files, which is something virtually none of them did in Windows XP,
no matter how capable the tool was."
Say what? What I don't see here from Jill is why in the world they
perceive the core consumer audience as too damn stupid to expand the
browse when there are literally hundreds of times when they are called
upon to do just that when working with Windows anything including Vista.
I think you're getting to the nitty gritty here of what lol or whom Jill
Z. considers "savvy." Not a helluva lot of people from what I've been
reading. Welcome to the Redmond campus where the slogan is
"like look dudes and dudettes just shedap and buy our stuff."
For example, in order to get a number of drivers to work for devices in
Vista, one absolutely has to browse to the location of the driver files
because if you try the same drivers that don't install readily by just
letting the wizard find them automatically 1) It won't 2) MSFT doesn't
even supply generic drivers for a ton of devices, older and current
anyway.
One Care does let you browse to modify what they will include a bit.
Here's how I read this but possibly Jill Zoeller is a lot more of an
English aficianado than I might be:
"Our core consumer audience--yo they ain't savvy users. Why the hell do
you think those unwashed turkey masses might actually want to be
discerning enough to backup individual files. You really think they
would be smart enough to expand a tree in browse and find a file? Hey
that might be like me going into my purse and finding some gum. We don't
want to put a big strain on these morons. We just want them to put out
$400 for each Vista ultimate the little nuclear family wants and another
$400-600 for each Office they buy.
We also had the idea that if any of them built computers, we would park
into the EULA tough luck suckah but just because you want to add a GPU
and the PSU to run that better ATI or NVIDIA we ain't gonna letcha."
That was modified shortly before so called RTM but that's the only aspect
so far of the EULA that needs to be modified that has.
You're asking that the pig not be released with lipstick on it and
christened RTM. We asked them about this and bugged the hell out of it
since July 2005. And the response was--what the hell don't you understand
about our arrogance and our tin ears?
You can see a lot of MSFT synchophants on here who like to ignore things
like this that you have presciently underscored. Many of them are MVPs
and there means of backing up is to buy Ghost or Acronis or some other
software that takes an image.
The MS Backup in XP was a real ridiculous joke because it couldn't backup
to media at all.
Let Jill Zoeller know
(e-mail address removed)
Maybe Jill will explain why they chose to ignore the hundreds of bugs on
this very problem, and why people who were designated to make backup that
they have rhapsodized is so "like kuelll" left out this functionality
from the get go, and reminded of it, chose to ignore fixing it without
any coherent explanation of why.
CH
Let's focus on exactly who is and who isn't participating in sending
people
to Iraq and if every single household is not willing to do that, and
waste
time and lives, let's get the hell out now. Every day that this is
posponed is indicative of a stupid and indifferent people who refuse to
let
their so called non-oversight practicing bribe taking self-indulgent
leadership all of whom don't have skin in the game in Iraq run their
treasure and country's lives and families right into the ground. If I
were
a terrorist watching the spectacle of this stupidity, I'd be ecstatic.
__________________________________________________
Yury A. said:
Lately you guys at Microsoft "amaze" me more and more with each new
product
you release. What were you thinking when you designed this Backup
Wizard?
Yes it's good for housewifes. But it's just a pile of trash for a users
who
need for a bit more advanced functionality. Same goes to OneCare’s
Backup
Wizard, as well. Gosh, and I thought the Backup Wizard in XP was not
really
good. But now I would love to have the XP's Backup Wizard on Vista.
Thanks Microsoft, now in order to backup my project I'll have to look an
buy
some third-party backup solution. This is so frustrating...
:
XP and old versions all had a way to backup specific folders, so I
would
backup just my documents folder. Now Vista has no way to specify and
wants to
back up the entire drive for restore.
this is great for drive manufacturers! but no so good for those of us
who
know how to do backups.
any word on how to backup specific folders or if this is another reason
to
stay with XP? Maybe the vista recommendation doc could specific buying
a
second external drive 2x size of main drives to use backup feature?
