VISTA SUCKS OMGZZLOLOLOL!!!!1111!!!!!ONE!!ONE111 GET A MAC!!!!

[Frank]

Holy Crap!!! So did I. Togos. Yummy. I added bacon and a side salad.

All I had was ham & cheese. :-(
Frank

 

[Alias]

HAHAHAHA!!!! So you "took offense" to my GENERAL question about linux
freaks? Admitting your guilt isn't helping you.

You also need to learn to read. Drama queen "MATERIAL" is not a
person. I also called an action "SAD", not a person.

Here's an insult for you. alias, you are so utterly and completely
ignorant that speaking English to you is a pointless waste of time. You
misunderstand 99% of the text you read. It's no wonder you're as
misinformed as you are.

You don't even realize what you're doing so it's useless to discuss it
with you.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Actually I try to help people who have older hardware upgrade to newer
technology. Thats part of my job.

Why, because they should be "embarrassed"?

And again you are the one calling me a name. You go around complaining
about people calling you names and adding nothing to the discussion then
you go and do it yourself... Thats called a hypocrit...

It's spelled "hypocrite". The "e" is silent. Doesn't Windows Mail have a
real time spell check?

Go ahead and call me a microsoft boy.

Calling you a Microsoft Boy was done in affection, not with disdain.
Now, had I said something like Linsux Luzzzers, you would have a point.

I happen to like a lot of their
software (not all of what they have but a lot of it).

There you go, point made.

I have tried
Ubunto Linux 7.04 and don't understand why you think it's so much better
than vista, buy hey, to each their own...

Being as you asked:

1. No activation

2. Can be installed on multiple computers for free.

3. No WGA

4. Safe surfing

5. Meets most people's needs and if you need Windows for a special
program, create a Window for it and, if you like, its very own Desktop
which would be only one click away.

6. It's free.

7. It doesn't require buying new hardware like Vista does.

8. No need for an anti virus or firewall.

9. No need for anti spy/mal/ad ware apps.

10. No reactivation if you update your drivers, hardware or BIOS.

11. Linux Update updates *everything* on your computer. No need to be
looking for a driver here, an update to Java there, Office here, Windows
there, Thunderbird here, Fire Fox there. You get the idea.

Enough reasons yet?

Now that you will have updated hardware maybe you could actually run
Vista and add something to the discussion instead of talk about stuff
you know nothing about.

Jeff

I'm not going to pay 813 US Dollars for an OS when perfectly fine ones
are available for free. And, being as I have three computers that could
run Vista, I would definitely not fork out over 2400 US Dollars to
"upgrade" them to Vista Ultimate.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Hum...according to you linux already flys on your machine. What's going
to do now? Spontaneously combust?

I can hardly wait to see.

You've already told us that you will (now) NEVER run Vista so why
upgrade? According to you, your current linux solution gives you
everything you need. I smell another steaming lie coming our way! I
sense the most recent version of Ubudubu doesn't run very well on his
POS hardware.

To be honest with you, Justin, two of the RAM cards failed the other day
and 256MB is just a little slower than I'm willing to put up with,
albeit a whole lot faster than with XP. I had to take XP off because it
was just painful to use. I'm giving it to a computer repair tech friend
of mine who will fix it up for someone who can't afford a computer.

An ASUS K7M is not a POS motherboard, btw. Lasting for over 8 years
ain't bad and the same is true for the AMD K7 805 Mhz processor that
came with it. I certainly got a lot of use out of it and made a very
decent living with it in the process.

Alias

 

[Justin]

I can hardly wait to see.


To be honest with you, Justin, two of the RAM cards failed the other day
and 256MB is just a little slower than I'm willing to put up with, albeit
a whole lot faster than with XP. I had to take XP off because it was just
painful to use. I'm giving it to a computer repair tech friend of mine who
will fix it up for someone who can't afford a computer.

An ASUS K7M is not a POS motherboard, btw. Lasting for over 8 years ain't
bad and the same is true for the AMD K7 805 Mhz processor that came with
it. I certainly got a lot of use out of it and made a very decent living
with it in the process.

Alias

My dad still has a Datsun truck....that thing must be "at least" 23 years
old and still runs. 23+ years doesn't mean it's not a POS by today's
standards as it very well is. We both agree on that. He keeps it only to
test how long it will actually run.

It's all about preference. I like to play games and these 8 year old
machines you keep around are garbage in my eyes. They can be gold in your
eyes and good for you! Don't expect the average person to feel the same
way.

8 year old PC + Linux = No damn good for running today's software.

 

[Justin]

I guess you think it's normal to call someone a "freak" and a "drama
queen", not to mention calling people "sad". It's so natural for you that
you don't even realize you're doing it.

....and I repeat:

You also need to learn to read. Drama queen "MATERIAL" is not a person. I
also called an action "SAD", not a person.

 

[Justin]

Damn...SP1 or maybe 2?
Frank

Vienna

 

[Doris Day - MVP]

All I had was ham & cheese. :-(

^^^^^

Committing cannabalism again, Frankie? <snort>

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Nina DiBoy]

The mouse thing would be enough for me to throw the damn thing out the
window.

Well, since I didn't have to pay for it, I enjoy having a hands on
opportunity to try it out for myself and see how bad it really is.
But paying for that opportunity would not be worth it to me. I'm trying
out Ubuntu Fiesty and Solaris 10 also.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"hahaha...oh, I do detect a hint of jealousy or what! Where Darrell
actually helps people all you do is beg for attention. Shame on you! Go
get professional psychological clinical help with your obvious problems
and stop your bandwidth sucking bullshit postings in this ng. (rip,
snort, belch, burp, chuckle)"

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Nina DiBoy]

ha...you actually believe that?
Frank

Careful Frank. You are showing yourself for the fanboi you really are.
I am not the only person who has posted about this in this group.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"hahaha...oh, I do detect a hint of jealousy or what! Where Darrell
actually helps people all you do is beg for attention. Shame on you! Go
get professional psychological clinical help with your obvious problems
and stop your bandwidth sucking bullshit postings in this ng. (rip,
snort, belch, burp, chuckle)"

"Good poets borrow; great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Jeffrey S. Sparks]

Actually my laptop is about a year old and my desktop goin on 2 years old.

Jeff

 

[Thor]

All I had was ham & cheese. :-(
Frank

I'm retired and cannot afford the ham and cheese - just the bread!

However, I do manage to accomplish two things at once: I put a light
coat of motor oil on one of the slices - it gives it moisture and really
lubricates my joints.

Motor oil: $3.00 Tums: $2.00 Total: $5.00
Arthritis medicine: $53.00

You do the math!

 

[Ronnie Vernon MVP]

I'm retired and cannot afford the ham and cheese - just the bread!

However, I do manage to accomplish two things at once: I put a light coat
of motor oil on one of the slices - it gives it moisture and really
lubricates my joints.

Motor oil: $3.00 Tums: $2.00 Total: $5.00
Arthritis medicine: $53.00

You do the math!

You probably won't believe this but have you ever tried WD40 on those
joints? Works.

 

[xfile]

Interesting, as an O/S itself typically does nothing that can make you

money. It's application's that you use on an O/S that make the money.

Well said, and while I am still waiting for official and objective reports
from research firms, such as Gartner, I couldn't find any "tangible
evidences" for so-called "working faster" statement.

In particular, I look forward those MVP's to provide so that we know they
are truly objective, sophisticated, and scientific.

But what I can share is the following: Note: I normally won't post the
entire article but this is restricted to subscribers.
Link:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117...EYWORDS=Windows+Vista&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month




Vista Suffers a Lot
Of Criticism, but Not
All of It Is Undeserved
April 25, 2007; Page B1
Is Microsoft's new Vista operating system the troubled successor to Windows
XP that many people seem to believe it is? Probably not, though after
running my Expand All Folders Stress Test, I have my own complaint.

Vista was released in January, after years of delay; "The Wow Starts Now"
proclaimed Microsoft's ads. Upon introduction, Vista got its share of
favorable reviews, but there has since been a lot of griping. A reviewer for
one big tech Web site ran Vista for a month and pronounced it not ready for
the market, although he was immediately flamed by readers as a "Linux
fanboy." A common theme on other tech sites is that too many programs from
XP aren't properly working yet on Vista.

Hence the I-told-you-so comments last week, when Dell announced it would be
allowing all its customers to request Windows XP instead of Vista. Some
analysts said it was yet more evidence of Vista not catching on, though Dell
said it did the same thing during the 2001-2002 transition from Windows 2000
to XP.

Microsoft says there are actually fewer transition issues with Vista than
there were at this point with XP. But it admits there is a perception that
the opposite is the case. One reason, it says, is that there are so many
outlets -- blogs and the like -- for people who have had a problem with
Vista to vent their frustrations, even if that problem isn't representative
of what the average user experiences.

It's true that Microsoft is blasted for things for which, say, Apple gets a
free pass. MacInTouch, a Web site for Apple buffs, has a page listing dozens
of compatibility issues with the Mac Tiger operating-system upgrade from
2005. None of those hiccups kept anyone on the site from showering flower
petals on Tiger; the same list about Windows would have lead for calls for
Bill Gates's head.

Having said all that, permit me my own bit of venting after spending some
time with Vista.

My complaint, like many involving computers, involves something not many
others would care about: the apparent inability of Windows to handle very
large folders, like those containing thousands of subfolders with tens of
thousands of files and hundreds of gigabytes of information.

There is a shortcut in Windows Explorer that lets you expand all subfolders
within a folder with a single keystroke, meaning you can then scroll up and
down and see everything in the main folder, even items hidden in a
sub-sub-sub directory. (This is my preferred way to tend to my music
collection.)

The trick works fine for folders of modest size. But on big ones, Windows XP
simply chokes. The screen freezes up, the disk drive spins endlessly,
Windows Task Manager says the application is "Not Responding."

This has been the source of considerable personal annoyance over the years,
so much so that checking to see if Microsoft had fixed the problem with
Vista was the first thing I did.

At first, Vista looked promising. On my command, Windows Explorer started
expanding folders. But while the process started fast, it gradually slowed.
By the time it got to the Zs -- or 3,597 folders later -- six minutes had
gone by.

At that point, I could scroll up and down in my expanded list of folders,
but slowly. The hourglass cursor wouldn't go away, and I could hear the disk
drive spinning, meaning Vista was still on the case. It would take another
10 minutes for both to stop.

Being the curious sort, I wondered what my experience would be like on a
Macintosh. With my home network, I copied the big folder over to a borrowed
Apple and used the comparable "Expand All" feature in the Mac Finder. This
is when the wow really started: All 3,600 subfolders popped open in 30
seconds.

Both the PC and Mac were recent models with powerful CPUs and plenty of
memory. But maybe the Apple just had a faster disk drive. So I used the
network to "mount" the PC disk drive on the Mac, without actually copying
the folder, and tried the procedure again.

This time, the Mac was dealing with data physically stored on the PC, and it
was needing to first go through Windows to get access to them. Even then, it
did its folder expansion trick in a little over a minute and a half. So, in
working with files and folders, one of a computer's most basic tasks, the
Mac could do in 30 seconds what took Vista at least six minutes for, and
which XP couldn't do at all.

Once you start looking for these Windows vs. Mac speed differences, it's
easy to find other examples. For instance, I could shut down and then
restart the Mac in the time it took either version of Windows just to switch
off.

After I described my experience to them, Microsoft said I would have had
better luck viewing my files in its Media Player software. As for why its
file system simply wasn't more robust in the first place, it said it put its
development resources in areas that affect the most people.

Despite all this, I remain a not terribly unhappy Vista upgrade user. A
combination of entropy and familiarity keeps me from bolting. I also have a
belief that I'd be sure to find something with the Mac to complain about as
well.

Vista will slowly get better and go on to dominate computing, just like its
predecessors. That's one eternal verity. Mac owners feeling aggrieved about
same is another.

 

[Doris Day - MVP]

You probably won't believe this but have you ever tried WD40 on those
joints? Works.

I tried, but then the "joints" become impossible to light, let alone smoke.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Justin]

Well said, and while I am still waiting for official and objective reports
from research firms, such as Gartner, I couldn't find any "tangible
evidences" for so-called "working faster" statement.

In particular, I look forward those MVP's to provide so that we know they
are truly objective, sophisticated, and scientific.

But what I can share is the following: Note: I normally won't post the
entire article but this is restricted to subscribers.
Link:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117...EYWORDS=Windows+Vista&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month

"Working faster" can be seen on many different levels.

One being the end user who can now organize and find their files/data MUCH
quicker. Or how about users being able to bog their machines down with open
apps and NOT have them slow down or being able to use them individually at
FULL speed.

Now, this is where all the linux freaks jump out of the wood works and
say....MY LINUX CAN DO THAT!!!

So freaking what:

Another being on the IT side when it comes to managing client images or what
few images we now need thanks to Vista.

Add all the AD improvements that will mostly be seen with Longhorn Server
and you have enough reason to start moving forward today.

Until linux can run all the same corporate level AD integrated software I
NEED, it can keep it's rear end on basic application servers and home
desktops. Oh, and when I can install only ONE distro on hundreds of mixed
hardware machines and spend no more then 20 minutes time loading each
machine.

 

[Justin]

I tried, but then the "joints" become impossible to light, let alone
smoke.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

More lies from this linux freak. WD-40 is flammable. No, wait...that's
probably not a lie. I can honestly believe that you are incompetent enough
to not be able to set fire to something that is highly flammable. Ok, never
mind, this makes perfect sense! Typical pathetic pothead.

 

[DanS]

"Working faster" can be seen on many different levels.

One being the end user who can now organize and find their files/data
MUCH quicker. Or how about users being able to bog their machines
down with open apps and NOT have them slow down or being able to use
them individually at FULL speed.

Yes, maybe Vista can help you find your files faster, if you consistantly
lose track of everything and are completely disorganized yourself.

We're not talking about searching for files. We are talking about
application performance......PERIOD. Funny, whenever asked what's so much
faster in Vista, the answer is always searching. Is that all ? Probably,
because that the one of the few OS functions. Applications running on the
O/S do all the work.

In the post I replied to, the statement was made...."Would XP do what I
need? Yes, but not as fast or as well as I can do it now in Vista."

I'm still wondering how Vista can increase your skill level of whatever
you do. The above statement (not yours I know), the 'well' part, in my
eyes is interpreted as quality of work.

Now, this is where all the linux freaks jump out of the wood works and
say....MY LINUX CAN DO THAT!!!

Noone brought up Linux in this part of the thread, you did. I was asking
for an explanation of the aforementione statement.

So freaking what:

Another being on the IT side when it comes to managing client images
or what few images we now need thanks to Vista.

Images of what ?

Add all the AD improvements that will mostly be seen with Longhorn
Server and you have enough reason to start moving forward today.

Uh, yeah, I know countless people running Active Directory on their home
networks.

Until linux can run all the same corporate level AD integrated
software I NEED, it can keep it's rear end on basic application
servers and home desktops. Oh, and when I can install only ONE distro
on hundreds of mixed hardware machines and spend no more then 20
minutes time loading each machine.

Again, Linux is not the question.

 

[Justin]

Yes, maybe Vista can help you find your files faster, if you consistantly
lose track of everything and are completely disorganized yourself.

I know, in the past, you have made it very clear how ORGANIZED you are.
However, in a business setting being organized has nothing to do with it nor
does it negate the feature. You simply do not understand this and that's
fine. Others do and that's what matters.

Now let's tie this into home users. Who wants to use Vista at work to then
use XP at home? Funk Dat!!!

We're not talking about searching for files. We are talking about
application performance......PERIOD. Funny, whenever asked what's so much
faster in Vista, the answer is always searching.

No description was given to the term "faster". Faster does not only mean
application speed. Why is it whenever someone seeks new Vista features (to
debunk Vista) they narrow their path to only UI quickness? However, you
clearly missed my point about (or maybe you didn't understand it?) how a
user can load their machine with APPs where XP used to bog down and become
unresponsive, can now work at full speed. That is "APPLICATION
PERFORMANCE.....PERIOD."

Is that all ? Probably,
because that the one of the few OS functions. Applications running on the
O/S do all the work.

See above.

In the post I replied to, the statement was made...."Would XP do what I
need? Yes, but not as fast or as well as I can do it now in Vista."

I'm still wondering how Vista can increase your skill level of whatever
you do. The above statement (not yours I know), the 'well' part, in my
eyes is interpreted as quality of work.

Skill level? NO OS can raise your skill level by itself. What exactly are
you trying to prove?

The best/quickest example I can give is the following:

SAME MACHINE:

XP:
Run Folding@Home on max level. CPU hits 100%. System is slow to respond
and running anything else (IE, OE) is pointless. You simply can not use the
machine productively in any way.

Vista:
Run Folding@Home on max level. CPU hits 100%. System is quick to respond.
You can run any other applications with no problems and only a slight (VERY
SLIGHT) performance hit.

That is "APPLICATION PERFORMANCE.....PERIOD."

Noone brought up Linux in this part of the thread, you did. I was asking
for an explanation of the aforementione statement.

1. I didn't reply to you.
2. My comment stands.

Images of what ?

??? Try using the full term...CLIENT images. Those would be images of the
clients. Client machines. Maybe you prefer Ghost Images? Disk Images?
Clone Images? IBM PC Compatible System Images?

Uh, yeah, I know countless people running Active Directory on their home
networks.

Really? That's odd.

Again, Linux is not the question.

And it's certainly NOT the answer! Hehehehe.

 

[john]

More lies from this linux freak. WD-40 is flammable. No, wait...that's
probably not a lie. I can honestly believe that you are incompetent
enough to not be able to set fire to something that is highly flammable.
Ok, never mind, this makes perfect sense! Typical pathetic pothead.

WD-40 isn't flammable.
however, if you mix common brake fluid, with Clorox, it will make smoke, a
LOT of smoke.
(9 out of 10 guys who read this will try this before the weekend is over...)
LOL