Dave Pogue Reviews Vista in the NYT "Vista Wins on Looks. As for lacks..."

C

Chad Harris

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/t...4860d1fac&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

December 14, 2006
State Of The Art
Vista Wins on Looks. As for Lacks ...
By DAVID POGUE

"After five years of starts, stops, executive shuffling, feature rethinks
and delays, Windows Vista is finally complete. It's available to
corporations already, and starting Jan. 30, it's what you'll get on any new
PC. Its programmers, who probably haven't seen their families in months,
will have an especially merry Christmas this year.

So after five years, how is Windows Vista? Microsoft's description, which
you'll soon be seeing in millions of dollars' worth of advertising, is
"Clear, Confident, Connected." But a more truthful motto would be "Looks,
Locks, Lacks."

Looks

Windows Vista is beautiful. Microsoft has never taken elegance so seriously
before. Discreet eye candy is partly responsible. Windows and menus cast
subtle shadows. A new typeface gives the whole affair a fresh, modern
feeling. Subtle animations liven up the proceedings.

If the description so far makes Vista sound a lot like the Macintosh, well,
you're right. You get the feeling that Microsoft's managers put Mac OS X on
an easel and told the programmers, "Copy that."

Here are some of the grace notes that will remind you of similar ones on the
Mac: A list of favorite PC locations appears at the left side of every
Explorer window, which you can customize just by dragging folders in or out.
You now expand or collapse lists of folders by clicking little flippy
triangles. When you're dragging icons to copy them, a cursor "badge" appears
that indicates how many you're moving. The Minimize, Maximize and Close
buttons glow when your cursor passes over them. There's now a keystroke
(Alt+up arrow) to open the current folder's parent window, the one that
contains it.

Some of the big-ticket Vista features and programs are eerily familiar, too.
The biggest one is Instant Search, a text box at the bottom of the Start
menu. As you type here, the Start menu turns into a list of every file,
folder, program and e-mail message that contains your search phrase,
regardless of names or folder locations. It's a powerful, routine-changing
tool, especially when you seek a program that would otherwise require
burrowing through nested folders in the All Programs menu.

A similar Search box appears at the top of every desktop (Explorer) window,
for ease in plucking some document out of that more limited haystack.

New programs include the Sidebar, a floating layer of single-purpose
programs called gadgets ( Apple called them widgets) like a weather
reporter, stock tracker, currency converter, and so on; Photo Gallery, a
deliciously simple shoebox for digital photos; the bare-bones DVD Maker, for
designing scene-selection menus for home-burned video DVDs; and Chess
Titans, whose photorealistic board can be rotated in three-dimensional
space.

Flip 3-D, which presents all open windows in all programs as cards in a
floating deck, seems to be modeled on Mac OS X's Exposé feature - minus the
ability to see all the windows simultaneously. You have to flip through the
"cards" to find the one you want.

Now, before the hate-mail tsunami begins, it's important to note that Apple
has itself borrowed feature ideas on occasion, even from Windows. But never
this broadly, boldly or blatantly. There must be enough steam coming out of
Apple executives' ears to power the Polar Express.

Even so, brazen as it was, the heist was largely successful. Vista is
infinitely more pleasant to use than its predecessors. There's more logic to
its folder structure and naming scheme. Things are easier to find. Fewer
steps are required to perform common tasks, especially when it comes to
networking.

And besides, not all of the new goodies fell from the Apple tree. The new
grouping, stacking and filtering options give you efficient new ways to
parse the masses of files in a window. If you have a spare U.S.B. flash
drive, your PC can use it as extra main memory for a tiny speed boost.
Windows Speech Recognition isn't as accurate as, say, Dragon
NaturallySpeaking, but it's beautifully designed and much better than
previous Microsoft attempts.

Laptop luggers will love the clever new Sleep mode. It combines the best of
the old Standby mode (everything stays in memory so it's ready to go when
you reopen the lid) and the old Hibernate mode (after several hours, Windows
commits all this to the hard drive to save battery power).

And then there's Presentation Mode, the answer to a million PowerPoint
pitchers' prayers: it prevents your laptop from doing anything embarrassing
during your boardroom presentation. It won't go to sleep, display a screen
saver, pop up dialog boxes or play any beeps. It can even automatically
change your desktop wallpaper to something uncontroversial, so your bosses
won't unexpectedly glimpse the HotBikiniBabes.com photo that you usually
use.

Locks

The visual and feature upgrades are nice, but for Microsoft, security was an
even more important goal. As well it should be; Internet nastiness like
viruses and spyware were sapping the fun out of Windows PCs.

The list of internal fortifications could fill a stack of white papers (and
does), and the technical language could put the Energizer bunny to sleep.
But examples include Service Hardening, which prevents background programs
from tampering with essential system files, and address-space randomization,
which makes it impossible for viruses to find important software bits in
predictable places.

Other security-suite components are more visible. The much improved Internet
Explorer 7 (also available for Windows XP) alerts you when you're visiting
one of those fake bank or eBay Web sites (called phishing scams). Windows
Defender protects your PC from spyware. Parental Controls lets you, the
saintly parent, dictate what Web sites your children can visit, which people
they correspond with online, and even what times of day they can use the
machine.

Then there's User Account Control, an intrusive dialog box that pops up
whenever you try to install a program or adjust a PC-wide setting,
requesting that you confirm the change by entering your password. This will
strike most people as an unnecessary nuisance, and you can turn it off. But
it's actually one of Vista's most important new protection features; when
the day comes that a virus is making changes to your PC, and not you, you'll
know about it.

Lacks

Various Microsoft divisions split up the duties of writing the 50 million
lines of Vista code, and they didn't always share the same vision. The most
visible areas received the most attention, but many darker, less visited
corners weren't visited by the Microsoft Makeover fairy at all.

As a result, Vista has something of a multiple-personality disorder. Links
for common tasks sometimes appear at the left side of a window, sometimes
the right and sometimes across the top. In wizards (step-by-step "interview"
screens), the Back button is sometimes at the lower-left corner of the
dialog box, sometimes at the upper-left. Microsoft has hidden the
traditional menu bar in some programs (you can summon it by tapping the Alt
key), but not in others.

Here and there, you'll find some jaw-dropping misfires, too. For example,
Photo Gallery can play slide shows - but if you want music too, Microsoft
cheerfully suggests that you first switch into another program and start
some music playing there.

Windows finally comes with a prominent backup program. That's great, except
that you can specify only which categories of things to back up (pictures,
e-mail, and so on), not which specific files or folders.

And then there's that Sidebar, the floating layer of mini-programs. If you
close one of the gadgets, you lose its contents forever: your notes in the
Post-it Notes gadget, your stock portfolio in the Stocks gadget, and so on.
You couldn't save them if you wanted to. How could Microsoft have missed
that one?

Some useful XP features have simply been removed. NetMeeting, a program for
collaborating across a network, has been replaced by a Vista-only program
called Meeting Space - which lacks its predecessor's voice- and video-chat
features.

And WordPad, the built-in word processor, can no longer open Microsoft Word
files. That, evidently, is a ham-handed attempt to force you into buying
Microsoft Office. (Let's hope the masses realize that they have a free
alternative at docs.google.com.)

What to Do

Windows Vista is not, as the Web's chorus of caustic critics claim, little
more than a warmed-over Windows XP. Its more intelligent navigation and more
powerful file-manipulation tools provide you with greater efficiency from
Day 1. And while the more secure plumbing doesn't guarantee a virus-free
future, it will certainly make life more difficult for the sociopaths of the
Internet.

That's not to say, however, that Vista is worth standing in line for on Jan.
30. Moving to Vista means hunting for updated drivers for your printer,
audio card and so on, not to mention troubleshooting incompatible programs.
It also means some relearning, thanks to features that Microsoft has moved,
removed or rejiggered.

Microsoft isn't helping the confusion issue by releasing Vista in five
versions, each with different features: Home Basic, Home Premium, Business,
Enterprise and Ultimate. For example, the latter three offer Complete PC, a
feature that backs up your entire computer, programs and all; Home Premium
and Ultimate offer Media Center, which plays music, videos and photos on
your TV. You practically need an operating system just to choose an
operating system.

The prices range from $100 (for an upgrade version of Home Basic) to $400
(for the full version of Ultimate). Most people will probably wind up paying
$160, the price to upgrade to the Home Premium edition from an earlier
version of Windows. (Avoid Home Basic, which is too stripped-down to be
worthwhile.) For a fee, you'll be able to upgrade from one edition to
another.

Of course, none of this factors in the price of the new PC you'll probably
need. Vista requires a fairly modern PC, and unless you have a powerful
graphics card, some of its most useful new features turn themselves off. You
can download the free Vista Upgrade Advisor from Microsoft's Web site to see
if your PC will be able to handle Vista.

According to a SoftChoice survey, in fact, only 6 percent of existing
corporate PCs have enough muscle to run all of Vista's goodies. No wonder
Microsoft expects that only about 5 percent of PC users will upgrade their
existing computers to Vista.

Online, there's much talk of Vista's place in the universe. Is it too
little, too late? Does the Mac's uptick in market share threaten the
dominance of Windows? Does Web-based software make operating systems
obsolete?

None of the above. Windows isn't going anywhere, the landscape won't be
changing anytime soon, and the corporate world will still buy it 500 copies
at a time.

In other words, it doesn't matter what you (or tech reviewers) think of
Windows Vista; sooner or later, it's what most people will have on their
PCs. In that light, it's fortunate that Vista is better looking, better
designed and better insulated against the annoyances of the Internet. At the
very least, it's well equipped to pull the world's PCs along for the next
five years - or whenever the next version of Windows drops down the
chimney."
 
N

NewFox

VistaMe


Chad Harris said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/14/t...4860d1fac&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

December 14, 2006
State Of The Art
Vista Wins on Looks. As for Lacks ...
By DAVID POGUE

"After five years of starts, stops, executive shuffling, feature rethinks
and delays, Windows Vista is finally complete. It's available to
corporations already, and starting Jan. 30, it's what you'll get on any
new PC. Its programmers, who probably haven't seen their families in
months, will have an especially merry Christmas this year.

So after five years, how is Windows Vista? Microsoft's description, which
you'll soon be seeing in millions of dollars' worth of advertising, is
"Clear, Confident, Connected." But a more truthful motto would be "Looks,
Locks, Lacks."

Looks

Windows Vista is beautiful. Microsoft has never taken elegance so
seriously before. Discreet eye candy is partly responsible. Windows and
menus cast subtle shadows. A new typeface gives the whole affair a fresh,
modern feeling. Subtle animations liven up the proceedings.

If the description so far makes Vista sound a lot like the Macintosh,
well, you're right. You get the feeling that Microsoft's managers put Mac
OS X on an easel and told the programmers, "Copy that."

Here are some of the grace notes that will remind you of similar ones on
the Mac: A list of favorite PC locations appears at the left side of every
Explorer window, which you can customize just by dragging folders in or
out. You now expand or collapse lists of folders by clicking little flippy
triangles. When you're dragging icons to copy them, a cursor "badge"
appears that indicates how many you're moving. The Minimize, Maximize and
Close buttons glow when your cursor passes over them. There's now a
keystroke (Alt+up arrow) to open the current folder's parent window, the
one that contains it.

Some of the big-ticket Vista features and programs are eerily familiar,
too. The biggest one is Instant Search, a text box at the bottom of the
Start menu. As you type here, the Start menu turns into a list of every
file, folder, program and e-mail message that contains your search phrase,
regardless of names or folder locations. It's a powerful, routine-changing
tool, especially when you seek a program that would otherwise require
burrowing through nested folders in the All Programs menu.

A similar Search box appears at the top of every desktop (Explorer)
window, for ease in plucking some document out of that more limited
haystack.

New programs include the Sidebar, a floating layer of single-purpose
programs called gadgets ( Apple called them widgets) like a weather
reporter, stock tracker, currency converter, and so on; Photo Gallery, a
deliciously simple shoebox for digital photos; the bare-bones DVD Maker,
for designing scene-selection menus for home-burned video DVDs; and Chess
Titans, whose photorealistic board can be rotated in three-dimensional
space.

Flip 3-D, which presents all open windows in all programs as cards in a
floating deck, seems to be modeled on Mac OS X's Exposé feature - minus
the ability to see all the windows simultaneously. You have to flip
through the "cards" to find the one you want.

Now, before the hate-mail tsunami begins, it's important to note that
Apple has itself borrowed feature ideas on occasion, even from Windows.
But never this broadly, boldly or blatantly. There must be enough steam
coming out of Apple executives' ears to power the Polar Express.

Even so, brazen as it was, the heist was largely successful. Vista is
infinitely more pleasant to use than its predecessors. There's more logic
to its folder structure and naming scheme. Things are easier to find.
Fewer steps are required to perform common tasks, especially when it comes
to networking.

And besides, not all of the new goodies fell from the Apple tree. The new
grouping, stacking and filtering options give you efficient new ways to
parse the masses of files in a window. If you have a spare U.S.B. flash
drive, your PC can use it as extra main memory for a tiny speed boost.
Windows Speech Recognition isn't as accurate as, say, Dragon
NaturallySpeaking, but it's beautifully designed and much better than
previous Microsoft attempts.

Laptop luggers will love the clever new Sleep mode. It combines the best
of the old Standby mode (everything stays in memory so it's ready to go
when you reopen the lid) and the old Hibernate mode (after several hours,
Windows commits all this to the hard drive to save battery power).

And then there's Presentation Mode, the answer to a million PowerPoint
pitchers' prayers: it prevents your laptop from doing anything
embarrassing during your boardroom presentation. It won't go to sleep,
display a screen saver, pop up dialog boxes or play any beeps. It can even
automatically change your desktop wallpaper to something uncontroversial,
so your bosses won't unexpectedly glimpse the HotBikiniBabes.com photo
that you usually use.

Locks

The visual and feature upgrades are nice, but for Microsoft, security was
an even more important goal. As well it should be; Internet nastiness like
viruses and spyware were sapping the fun out of Windows PCs.

The list of internal fortifications could fill a stack of white papers
(and does), and the technical language could put the Energizer bunny to
sleep. But examples include Service Hardening, which prevents background
programs from tampering with essential system files, and address-space
randomization, which makes it impossible for viruses to find important
software bits in predictable places.

Other security-suite components are more visible. The much improved
Internet Explorer 7 (also available for Windows XP) alerts you when you're
visiting one of those fake bank or eBay Web sites (called phishing scams).
Windows Defender protects your PC from spyware. Parental Controls lets
you, the saintly parent, dictate what Web sites your children can visit,
which people they correspond with online, and even what times of day they
can use the machine.

Then there's User Account Control, an intrusive dialog box that pops up
whenever you try to install a program or adjust a PC-wide setting,
requesting that you confirm the change by entering your password. This
will strike most people as an unnecessary nuisance, and you can turn it
off. But it's actually one of Vista's most important new protection
features; when the day comes that a virus is making changes to your PC,
and not you, you'll know about it.

Lacks

Various Microsoft divisions split up the duties of writing the 50 million
lines of Vista code, and they didn't always share the same vision. The
most visible areas received the most attention, but many darker, less
visited corners weren't visited by the Microsoft Makeover fairy at all.

As a result, Vista has something of a multiple-personality disorder. Links
for common tasks sometimes appear at the left side of a window, sometimes
the right and sometimes across the top. In wizards (step-by-step
"interview" screens), the Back button is sometimes at the lower-left
corner of the dialog box, sometimes at the upper-left. Microsoft has
hidden the traditional menu bar in some programs (you can summon it by
tapping the Alt key), but not in others.

Here and there, you'll find some jaw-dropping misfires, too. For example,
Photo Gallery can play slide shows - but if you want music too, Microsoft
cheerfully suggests that you first switch into another program and start
some music playing there.

Windows finally comes with a prominent backup program. That's great,
except that you can specify only which categories of things to back up
(pictures, e-mail, and so on), not which specific files or folders.

And then there's that Sidebar, the floating layer of mini-programs. If you
close one of the gadgets, you lose its contents forever: your notes in the
Post-it Notes gadget, your stock portfolio in the Stocks gadget, and so
on. You couldn't save them if you wanted to. How could Microsoft have
missed that one?

Some useful XP features have simply been removed. NetMeeting, a program
for collaborating across a network, has been replaced by a Vista-only
program called Meeting Space - which lacks its predecessor's voice- and
video-chat features.

And WordPad, the built-in word processor, can no longer open Microsoft
Word files. That, evidently, is a ham-handed attempt to force you into
buying Microsoft Office. (Let's hope the masses realize that they have a
free alternative at docs.google.com.)

What to Do

Windows Vista is not, as the Web's chorus of caustic critics claim, little
more than a warmed-over Windows XP. Its more intelligent navigation and
more powerful file-manipulation tools provide you with greater efficiency
from Day 1. And while the more secure plumbing doesn't guarantee a
virus-free future, it will certainly make life more difficult for the
sociopaths of the Internet.

That's not to say, however, that Vista is worth standing in line for on
Jan. 30. Moving to Vista means hunting for updated drivers for your
printer, audio card and so on, not to mention troubleshooting incompatible
programs. It also means some relearning, thanks to features that Microsoft
has moved, removed or rejiggered.

Microsoft isn't helping the confusion issue by releasing Vista in five
versions, each with different features: Home Basic, Home Premium,
Business, Enterprise and Ultimate. For example, the latter three offer
Complete PC, a feature that backs up your entire computer, programs and
all; Home Premium and Ultimate offer Media Center, which plays music,
videos and photos on your TV. You practically need an operating system
just to choose an operating system.

The prices range from $100 (for an upgrade version of Home Basic) to $400
(for the full version of Ultimate). Most people will probably wind up
paying $160, the price to upgrade to the Home Premium edition from an
earlier version of Windows. (Avoid Home Basic, which is too stripped-down
to be worthwhile.) For a fee, you'll be able to upgrade from one edition
to another.

Of course, none of this factors in the price of the new PC you'll probably
need. Vista requires a fairly modern PC, and unless you have a powerful
graphics card, some of its most useful new features turn themselves off.
You can download the free Vista Upgrade Advisor from Microsoft's Web site
to see if your PC will be able to handle Vista.

According to a SoftChoice survey, in fact, only 6 percent of existing
corporate PCs have enough muscle to run all of Vista's goodies. No wonder
Microsoft expects that only about 5 percent of PC users will upgrade their
existing computers to Vista.

Online, there's much talk of Vista's place in the universe. Is it too
little, too late? Does the Mac's uptick in market share threaten the
dominance of Windows? Does Web-based software make operating systems
obsolete?

None of the above. Windows isn't going anywhere, the landscape won't be
changing anytime soon, and the corporate world will still buy it 500
copies at a time.

In other words, it doesn't matter what you (or tech reviewers) think of
Windows Vista; sooner or later, it's what most people will have on their
PCs. In that light, it's fortunate that Vista is better looking, better
designed and better insulated against the annoyances of the Internet. At
the very least, it's well equipped to pull the world's PCs along for the
next five years - or whenever the next version of Windows drops down the
chimney."
 
M

Mike

BChad Harris said:
That's not to say, however, that Vista is worth standing in line for on
Jan. 30. Moving to Vista means hunting for updated drivers for your
printer, audio card and so on, not to mention troubleshooting incompatible
programs.

No, it *might* mean hunting for updated drivers, and *perhaps*
troubleshooting *some* incompatible programs. Both of my HP printers work
fine - a LaserJet 4+ and a DeskJet 970 inkjet. All of my other hardware
works also - ATI X800 XT video, both network cards, etc.

Otherwise a good review, but the above gives the impression that nothing
works.

Mike
 
C

Chad Harris

The situation with many printer drivers is that XP drivers work if you use
Virtual Ports. The Vista print team lied to a group of us who went to them
and asked them to change the default to help facilitate printers working.

It's always great to hear when one peson says "all my drivers work all my
peripherals work well; my hardware works great in Vista." We all want that.
But stay tuned, because I predict about March that MSFT is going to be
overwhelmed with problems with Vista way beyond the number that there have
been in XP at the same time period in its circulation/adoption to the
general public.

If you go to http://support.microsoft.com and do a search on Windows Vista
there are over 200 MSKBs. It's positive that they are finally getting
around to doing some more--for 15 months that number was low--but if you
read ***many of them they are just plain bugs they shipped with, they
refused to fix when reported to them, and they could have their own subset
called "tin ear." They say "we know the bug is there and we don't have a
fix." I haven't counted how many there are like this, but I will soon. I
can add at least 100 bugs to that list. What they don't say is that "we
knew it was there in the fall of 2005 and we elected not to try to fix it or
we couldn't fix it."

The fact that MSFT who is supporting Vista by phone now (they can't tell if
you were part of the so called CPP which was really an ad campaign or not
anyway):

Phone Number: 866-425-0593 "English only" support The version of English
that their India Convergys PSS speaks is unintelligible. They aren't going
to understand you either, if you speak English.

I think it's fascinating that they say it's "English only" because what is
spoken (not by Indians at large) but by the Indians who man the PSS phone
lines as Convergys of Ohio the company who contracts to do MSFT Support for
the public (MSFT doesn't do support for the public via phone--don't be
fooled) can't speak intelligible English nor do they know anything that has
clinical efficacy on the ground towards fixing Windows or Office nor have
they for over ten years.

I could find tons of things we fix routinely hear that those bozos can't
fix. MSFT should have kicked Convergys of Ohio to the curb long ago, but
they're dirt cheap and it's outta sight outta mind for MSFT with public
support. It's interesting that Dell alleges they paid $100 million to
improve support, because Dell uses the same crappy Indian support that is
just as bad most of the time with hardware support as MSFT is with their
oursourced contract for public support. MSFT outsources it to Convergys and
conergys outsources it to India for the highest percentage of their call
volume.

One of several subjects you'll never see a MSFTie come in this group or
anywhere else and discuss is the eggrigious quality of their support. They
don't want to know about it.

If anyone has a printer not working, you might try right clicking the
printer in the printers folder (get to it by going though the Control Panel
or Device Manager)>Ports tab>and selecting USB Virtual port.

Brother is telling people that they have given drivers to MSFT and they have
given some drivers--My Printer worked in every build of Vista until RTM, but
that the drivers may be less functionality than their finally released Vista
driver which doesn't make a lot of sense, although they might mean they'll
update it for Vista.

David Pogue is a very good author--he probably leans towards Apple products,
but he writes O'Reilly missing manuals for XP and soon for Vista and you
should catch his columns at www.nytimes.com/circuits or in the print edition
of the NYT.

I should have included an aritcle on Vista from Wall Street Journal's Walter
Mossberg. It can be read here under the Nove 2 category:

http://ptech.wsj.com/archive.html

CH
 
M

Mike

Chad Harris said:
The situation with many printer drivers is that XP drivers work if you
use Virtual Ports. The Vista print team lied to a group of us who went to
them and asked them to change the default to help facilitate printers
working.

I've seen this mentioned before. What exactly is a "virtual port"? How do
you set it up?

My DeskJet is running off the parallel port. The LaserJet 4+ is in IP
device, and is plugged into my network hub. Both have drivers included with
Vista.

Mike
 
A

Alexander Suhovey

Chad Harris said:
It's always great to hear when one peson says "all my drivers work all my
peripherals work well; my hardware works great in Vista." We all want
that.

I must be one ot those lucky b@stards. Because all my drivers work all my
peripherals work well; my hardware works great in Vista.
 
J

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"The Vista print team lied..."
You have said that before.
BUT when asked for a reference, you ignore the request.
Can you backup that statement?
If not, the statement is inappropriate and may even be illegal.

"I predict about March..."
You have stated this hogwash before except now you have conveniently moved
from January to March.
You seem to ignore the reality that with the final public release of Vista
more will be using Vista.
With larger numbers come more issues, both perceived and real.
This would happen with ant software from any manufacturer and yet you seem
to focus only on the gloom.
Those that have success dilute this myth of yours so you often find a weak
excuse to dismiss the successes.

"for 15 months that number was low..."
Pretty meaningless since Microsoft avoids articles about Beta products.

I did not read further as it was obviously simply a rant.
 
S

Stubby

Jupiter, Remember "Those who don't know talk. Those who know don't talk."

So just let this nonsense evaporate.
 
C

Chad Harris

Whioh lol is why there are so many stubbythe stub help posts on these
newsgroups of course. Good post Stubbo.

"Any moron can make posts that detract."

George Bush 43 Dover Coffin Maker Extrordinaire to Apathetic Americans

LOL

CH
 
C

Chad Harris

The documentation is on public Vista Beta chats, and it is in the Vista
print TBT newsgroup and you currently have access to both Mr. Kimball.

LOL--Only someone named Mat Kimball who would adopt some comic strip name
Jupiter Jones for whatever reasons as his pen name would post garbage like
this, without addressing the source.

What would be appropriate is for the MSFT digital document team to fire up
an MSKB now that they've screwed the pooch and RTM's Vista on November 7,
2006and shipped Vista RTM to a lot of people and cannot unring this bell.

Let me be perfectly clear. My objective is to help people who need their
printer, but don't care to take a lot of time to explore the software
printing with the drivers they have until months later when more drivers
that can help them are made available to MSFT by the printer manufacturers
and are on the printer manufacturer sites, instead of meaningless statements
that they will support Vista with when that will happen intentionally not on
HP or any other site.

I can't see every post on every group. I don't have time, and I'm not going
to configure message rules so that I get notified every time somone replies
to a post. I certainly have said this two or three times on this group. The
request for a reference (no doubt from you Mr. Kimball) has not been
ignored; I just didn't see it until now by accident. I am delighted to give
you a reference and several of us had repeated constructive conversations
on this very topic in detail on the TBT groups with Tali Roth, Lead Program
Manager of the Digital Documents team and I know this subject was raised to
members of that team at more than one WHDC (Windows Hardware Engineering
Course).

The erudite. and legally adept and very experienced litigator Mat Kimball of
Medicine Hat Canada posted to me:

"The Vista print team lied..."
You have said that before.
BUT when asked for a reference, you ignore the request.
Can you backup that statement?
If not, the statement is inappropriate and may even be illegal.

Really. Psst Mat. Let me help you. I know you're not legally sophisticated
but that's okay. The statement is appropriate although perhaps you would
have liked a more diplomatic word choice than "lied." You would have liked
"did not keep the promise they made repeatedly in different venues to
several of us during the TBT."

As in "the President of the United States and his team made some terrific
mistakes" instead of the reality that they continue to lie repeatedly about
a situation that is costing about 750 US lives per month and some Canadian
lives although the Canuks are getting the hell outta Dodge.

There is nothing "illegal" about what I said in the United States. I don't
really care much about Canadian law. I know Conrad Black from Canada seems
to care about U.S. Law because he's being put on trial by the US attorney in
March 2007 (I liked his book on Roosevelt actually) and Jennifer Granholm
Governor of Michigan, originally from Canada has to contend with US law now.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2005/12/16/black-051216.html

Herrrrressss some Backup Mr. Mat Kanuk Kimball. It's my distinct pleasure
and there is more in content that is private and MSFT has requested not to
post. LOL to the 64th baby. I love these kind of wild ass ridiculous
challenges. Next time focus on the issue which is the port that will help
more printers print while using Windows Vista since my information was it
was made widely available to the public as a Beta many months ago and is
about to go on sale to the public around January 30, 2007 and is on sale in
the US now by volume licensing programs at Comp USA.

What was I trying to get done? I was trying to get more printers to work.
There are two major reasons why simple printers aren't working in Vista
right now--to stay away from sophisticated networking setups or print setups
in larger organizations.

One of them is that people try to load drivers before they get the hardware
recognized by either XP or Vista. That's unfortunate and it's unfortunate
that directions from manufactures often say to do this. It produces a "false
positive 16 bit subsystem error." I call it false positive because there
really is not a 16 bit sub system problem

The other is that XP drivers (many but not all of them) or earlier drivers
can and will work on Vista if you go to the Printer Port tab as I've
outlined, and you use the pulldown to check Virtual USB Port instead of the
defaulted LPT port or Com ports.

1) In the first place it's as intriguing that Jupiter Jones aka Mat
Kimball doesn't address the real issue of trying to get more printers up and
running for users of this group and users of Windows Vista. Defaulting to a
parallel port when USB cords have been standard and faster and more
efficient for a panoply of reasons for nearly ten years or more. I have
gotten scroes of printers working on boxes by changing their ports who are
using XP drivers because their printer manufacturer has not 1) made drivers
for Vista yet on their site or 2) as some have given MSFT any drivers for
their recent printer.

2) It amuses me that Mat Kimball lol instead of focusing on the issue (bring
it Mat on the virtues of defaulting a parallel printer port on January 30.
2007 when some Vista public purchases could take place of so-called RTM
Vista with scores of MSKBs now that say "we know it's a problem and we don't
have a clue how to fix it" seems to get satisfaction out of "demanding
documentation" when nearly every post I do has a link or substantive
documentation.

However, I have emails and posts on the Vista TBT newsgroups where a group
of us raised this issue and were promised explicitly this would be changed.
It was not. Check out the default port on the port tab for Windows Vista
RTM and you'll see they did not change it. Technically MSFT has asked that
TBT newsgroup content not be posted, so I'll honor that. However, I can
post this from a Vista Beta Print Chat where I raised the question. It just
does not have the detail or the gang of us that made the point to the print
team that it is ludicrous to default a parallel port and it costs a lot of
unwitting users the use of their printer. We have scores of people pleading
for printer drivers they don't have yet on this group.

From a Vista Print chat, and I have transcripts of every Beta chat but I am
going to use a web link so that it can be accessed by anyone. You can find
this exchange in this Vista TBT Print Chat. Permission has been given
repeatedly by MSFT to post these chats on the web so don't get your sigmoid
colon spazzed into a several knots over this.
___________________________________________________________________
Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think is
much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately versus
not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still preferrring LPT1.
That is a mistake to list LPT1 as
the preferred port because 1) More XP drivers will work if people use
USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is ***not the preferred port. It is less
than preferred unless you don't want some printers to work in Vista. Alan
Morris said they would consider this on Print Team and have been and is
their an update?"selection for LPT is due to the fact that USB devices are
supposed to Plug and Play and customers don't have to run the Add Printer
Wizard to select the port and add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't know Canadianese that well. It's a brand of English where you can
always tell the Canuk by their pronunciation of key words. However, in my
country generally when someone says "We're working on fixing this one--the
Add Printer Wizard will not suggest lpt as the default port" and that
someone is from the Vista print team, it pretty much means what it says and
this promise again, was not kept.

CH
 
C

Chad Harris

You are a lucky bastard I suppose but also the bell shaped curve of users
don't have any of the tools, sophistication and expertese you have. I enjoy
and learn from your posts.

I have had all my drivers working for some time in Vista and although I want
to fix a lot of bugs they didn't fix have been able to use it for production
since late 2005. There were 3 drivers that gave me some problems at first,
and one driver (my Nic card that stopped loading automatically about Build
5472. But since that was 8 builds ago, I've learned to have all the
workarounds for any problem drivers like my old sound card ready in a folder
to browse to the second I setup a new Vista on a box, and since there have
been so many builds, a lot of us have had a lot of practice in wiping one
Vista and setting up another and have deleloped the way to save what we want
for immediate application to the new Vista.

I can't explain the reasons precisely why changing from USB/Virtual port
makes a large number of printers work, but on a basic level, if they aren't
using a parallel cable, that points to a mismatch.

When i first noticed a pritner not working on a box in an early Vista build,
I took a look at the ports and when I recognized an LPT default and a USB
choice using USB 2 cable on the printer, it was logical to try it.

CH
 
C

Chad Harris

I haven't ever given the impression though that nothing works and I doubt
that since he's writing the two O'Reilly books on Vista The Missing Manual
which are pretty well written that David Pogue the lead writer for Circuits
and computer and gadget articles in the NY Times is going to be taking that
strong a position Mike.

David Pogue has written enough excellent Windows books that I doubt he is
anti-MSFT or anti-Windows but he probably has a point of view. If he were a
Windows hater, or a totally negative on Widows, it would have been hard for
him to write enthusiastic books for O'Reilly that have helped a lot of
people use Windows from 98 on up through Vista.

Check out this recent transcript. By the way Preston Gralla's books on XP
for O'Reilly (the Hacks books and the XP cookbook were excellent. I'd expect
the same from Preston Gralla with Vista.

A conversation with David Pogue, author of Windows Vista: The Missing Manual
Friday December 22, 2006 8:04AM
by Preston Gralla in Opinion

http://www.oreillynet.com/windows/blog/2006/12/a_conversation_with_author_dav.html

CH
 
M

Mike

Chad Harris said:
I haven't ever given the impression though that nothing works

I never said you did.

What I was referring to was this sentence: " Moving to Vista means hunting
for updated drivers for your
printer, audio card and so on, not to mention troubleshooting incompatible
programs."

Better phrasing would have been "Moving to Vista sometimes
means............"

The former gives the impression that nothing works out of the box.

Mike
 
J

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"...without addressing the source"
I addressed the source by asking for your source.
You post without a reference then go on a wild tantrum when asked to support
what you have said.
the simple answer is for you to give a reference when making such a strong
statement.
But, you like the dramatic for reasons only known to you.

I finally found it after wading through your irrelevant rambling.

Whatever reason you brought Canadian politics into this is know only to you
since there is no relevance whatsoever.
I have no idea what so ever of your reason unless it is to further your
political agenda.
Similarly, you brought up American politics in your wild rant.

"Let me be perfectly clear. My objective..."
With all your political irrelevant garbage, you have done a great deal to
make your agenda clear as largely being political.
If you want to show otherwise, leave the political where it belongs and that
is clearly not here.

Your personal insults as well as your WRONG assumptions show your character
again.
If you had confidence in what you said, you would say it.
Instead, again you feel the need to shore up your position with personal
attacks.
Have someone else make your point, there are those able and more capable
than you.
Again you failed miserably.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


Chad Harris said:
The documentation is on public Vista Beta chats, and it is in the Vista
print TBT newsgroup and you currently have access to both Mr. Kimball.

LOL--Only someone named Mat Kimball who would adopt some comic strip name
Jupiter Jones for whatever reasons as his pen name would post garbage like
this, without addressing the source.

What would be appropriate is for the MSFT digital document team to fire up
an MSKB now that they've screwed the pooch and RTM's Vista on November 7,
2006and shipped Vista RTM to a lot of people and cannot unring this bell.

Let me be perfectly clear. My objective is to help people who need their
printer, but don't care to take a lot of time to explore the software
printing with the drivers they have until months later when more drivers
that can help them are made available to MSFT by the printer manufacturers
and are on the printer manufacturer sites, instead of meaningless
statements that they will support Vista with when that will happen
intentionally not on HP or any other site.

I can't see every post on every group. I don't have time, and I'm not
going to configure message rules so that I get notified every time somone
replies to a post. I certainly have said this two or three times on this
group. The request for a reference (no doubt from you Mr. Kimball) has not
been ignored; I just didn't see it until now by accident. I am delighted
to give you a reference and several of us had repeated constructive
conversations on this very topic in detail on the TBT groups with Tali
Roth, Lead Program Manager of the Digital Documents team and I know this
subject was raised to members of that team at more than one WHDC (Windows
Hardware Engineering Course).

The erudite. and legally adept and very experienced litigator Mat Kimball
of Medicine Hat Canada posted to me:

"The Vista print team lied..."
You have said that before.
BUT when asked for a reference, you ignore the request.
Can you backup that statement?
If not, the statement is inappropriate and may even be illegal.

Really. Psst Mat. Let me help you. I know you're not legally
sophisticated but that's okay. The statement is appropriate although
perhaps you would have liked a more diplomatic word choice than "lied."
You would have liked "did not keep the promise they made repeatedly in
different venues to several of us during the TBT."

As in "the President of the United States and his team made some terrific
mistakes" instead of the reality that they continue to lie repeatedly
about a situation that is costing about 750 US lives per month and some
Canadian lives although the Canuks are getting the hell outta Dodge.

There is nothing "illegal" about what I said in the United States. I
don't really care much about Canadian law. I know Conrad Black from
Canada seems to care about U.S. Law because he's being put on trial by the
US attorney in March 2007 (I liked his book on Roosevelt actually) and
Jennifer Granholm Governor of Michigan, originally from Canada has to
contend with US law now.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2005/12/16/black-051216.html

Herrrrressss some Backup Mr. Mat Kanuk Kimball. It's my distinct pleasure
and there is more in content that is private and MSFT has requested not to
post. LOL to the 64th baby. I love these kind of wild ass ridiculous
challenges. Next time focus on the issue which is the port that will help
more printers print while using Windows Vista since my information was it
was made widely available to the public as a Beta many months ago and is
about to go on sale to the public around January 30, 2007 and is on sale
in the US now by volume licensing programs at Comp USA.

What was I trying to get done? I was trying to get more printers to work.
There are two major reasons why simple printers aren't working in Vista
right now--to stay away from sophisticated networking setups or print
setups in larger organizations.

One of them is that people try to load drivers before they get the
hardware recognized by either XP or Vista. That's unfortunate and it's
unfortunate that directions from manufactures often say to do this. It
produces a "false positive 16 bit subsystem error." I call it false
positive because there really is not a 16 bit sub system problem

The other is that XP drivers (many but not all of them) or earlier drivers
can and will work on Vista if you go to the Printer Port tab as I've
outlined, and you use the pulldown to check Virtual USB Port instead of
the defaulted LPT port or Com ports.

1) In the first place it's as intriguing that Jupiter Jones aka Mat
Kimball doesn't address the real issue of trying to get more printers up
and running for users of this group and users of Windows Vista.
Defaulting to a parallel port when USB cords have been standard and faster
and more efficient for a panoply of reasons for nearly ten years or more.
I have gotten scroes of printers working on boxes by changing their ports
who are using XP drivers because their printer manufacturer has not 1)
made drivers for Vista yet on their site or 2) as some have given MSFT any
drivers for their recent printer.

2) It amuses me that Mat Kimball lol instead of focusing on the issue
(bring it Mat on the virtues of defaulting a parallel printer port on
January 30. 2007 when some Vista public purchases could take place of
so-called RTM Vista with scores of MSKBs now that say "we know it's a
problem and we don't have a clue how to fix it" seems to get satisfaction
out of "demanding documentation" when nearly every post I do has a link or
substantive documentation.

However, I have emails and posts on the Vista TBT newsgroups where a group
of us raised this issue and were promised explicitly this would be
changed. It was not. Check out the default port on the port tab for
Windows Vista RTM and you'll see they did not change it. Technically MSFT
has asked that TBT newsgroup content not be posted, so I'll honor that.
However, I can post this from a Vista Beta Print Chat where I raised the
question. It just does not have the detail or the gang of us that made
the point to the print team that it is ludicrous to default a parallel
port and it costs a lot of unwitting users the use of their printer. We
have scores of people pleading for printer drivers they don't have yet on
this group.

From a Vista Print chat, and I have transcripts of every Beta chat but I
am going to use a web link so that it can be accessed by anyone. You can
find this exchange in this Vista TBT Print Chat. Permission has been
given repeatedly by MSFT to post these chats on the web so don't get your
sigmoid colon spazzed into a several knots over this.
___________________________________________________________________
Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think is
much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately
versus not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still preferrring
LPT1. That is a mistake to list LPT1 as
the preferred port because 1) More XP drivers will work if people use
USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is ***not the preferred port. It is less
than preferred unless you don't want some printers to work in Vista. Alan
Morris said they would consider this on Print Team and have been and is
their an update?"selection for LPT is due to the fact that USB devices are
supposed to Plug and Play and customers don't have to run the Add Printer
Wizard to select the port and add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't know Canadianese that well. It's a brand of English where you can
always tell the Canuk by their pronunciation of key words. However, in my
country generally when someone says "We're working on fixing this one--the
Add Printer Wizard will not suggest lpt as the default port" and that
someone is from the Vista print team, it pretty much means what it says
and this promise again, was not kept.

CH
 
D

Dale

In fact, for the masses, we have no idea what moving to Vista implies in
regards to drivers. For early adopters, we have had to do some things. We
don't yet know what January 30th will bring.

Moving to XP today, with new hardware, means having to search for drivers.
Most currently used hardware came out long after XP Gold.

Dale
 
C

Chad Harris

Again, Telus Mr. Kimball (it takes a real chisel to get though that thick
skull) Mat :--

Where's your comment on enabling more people to be able to use their
printers NOW in Vista and these discussions took place in May nearly 8
months and many builds ago. This is a quintissential example of Vista teams
having tin ears and making Vista a lot worse than it could have been. The
parallels are in the appendix.

Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think is
much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately versus
not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still preferrring LPT1.
That is a mistake to list LPT1 asthe preferred port because 1) More XP
drivers will work if people use USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is ***not
the preferred port. It is less than preferred unless you don't want some
printers to work in Vista. Alan Morris said they would consider this on
Print Team and have been and is their an update?"selection for LPT is due to
the fact that USB devices are supposed to Plug and Play and customers don't
have to run the Add Printer Wizard to select the port and add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.

*******In fact, Vista RTM out of the box has LPT as its default port and
they didn't "work on fixing this one."

Again they were reminded of discussions on the group:


Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):
Q: And as KoZe pointed out on the thread the number of printers coming to
mkt with an LPT1 port is diminishing for home printers.
A: We're aware of this :) We're changing the Add Printer Wizard.

******In fact Vista RTM out of the box has LPT as its default prot and they
didn't change it.

There were a number of other discussions with them in the newsgroup and with
Tali Roth PM of the Digital Print team at MSFT. They were acutely aware of
it. They didn't touch the default Printer port after saying they would
change it.

1) The issue was simply how to help people use their printers. I don't see
one word from you that has to do with printers on this thread and it's so
typical. Back in the day, Matt Kimball aka Jupiter Jones concentrated on
Windows issues. Now apparently some components of male menopause have taken
over your pyche.

I knew the way. MSFT agreed. MSFT didn't follow through and their were
several discussions and they heard from others in the same vein. Half of
the MSKBs I see right now were bugs.

As I said prepeatedly, they were told that switching from a default parallel
port to a USB port would enable more printers to work out of the box. They
agreed and then for reasons I can't guess did not do what they said they
were going to do. You didn't address that. You asked for proof. You have
it.

Did I mention more older drivers (that aren't modded or made for Vista
specifically) since many companies are dragging their feet will work if you
changed printer ports? Maybe if HP had focused more on driver development
than eavsdropping on their employees they could have had the time and money
to develop drivers a thousand times over.

2) I didn't wade into Canadian politics. They really aren't a prime
concern. My references that
Americans are apathetic and their President is running them into the ground
as long as they stay apathetic are no more frequent than quotes people sign
with.

CH
____________

Appendix:

To the Editor December 23, 2006 NYTimes

Re "Rudderless in Iraq" (editorial, Dec. 21):

It is time someone pointed out that while the American public and the press
allow this president to reconsider, gather data, conduct a listening tour
and generally stonewall, every single day, some mother will bury her son and
a child will say a final farewell to a father.

There is a real cost in lives, both American and Iraqi, that we deny
utterly.

We have to leave, now. Otherwise, the president should get on a plane, fly
to Baghdad, look the people in the eye and select which ones he is prepared
to sacrifice in his war.

Fellow citizens, where's the outrage? Nancy Hughes

San Francisco, Dec. 21, 2006


To the Editor:

On Nov. 7, the American electorate gave the government a clear directive to
withdraw United States troops from Iraq. Six weeks later, as you say in your
editorial, President Bush and his administration are contemplating sending
more troops to Iraq.

In other words, not only will the directive given to the president by the
electorate be completely ignored, but exactly the opposite is being
contemplated.

It is difficult to imagine any other action that President Bush could take
that so clearly demonstrates his contempt for democratic processes as
outlined in the Constitution he swore to uphold.

Worse, in addition to the problematic issues raised in your editorial,
increasing troop strength by 10 percent will have only a marginal effect,
but Mr. Bush seems simply to lack the ability to move in a new direction, so
we are stuck as he makes the same mistakes again and again.

Ernest L. Mehler

To the Editor:

On Nov. 7, the American electorate gave the government a clear directive to
withdraw United States troops from Iraq. Six weeks later, as you say in your
editorial, President Bush and his administration are contemplating sending
more troops to Iraq.

In other words, not only will the directive given to the president by the
electorate be completely ignored, but exactly the opposite is being
contemplated.

It is difficult to imagine any other action that President Bush could take
that so clearly demonstrates his contempt for democratic processes as
outlined in the Constitution he swore to uphold.

Worse, in addition to the problematic issues raised in your editorial,
increasing troop strength by 10 percent will have only a marginal effect,
but Mr. Bush seems simply to lack the ability to move in a new direction, so
we are stuck as he makes the same mistakes again and again.

Ernest L. Mehler

New York, Dec. 21, 2006



To the Editor:

I have become inured to the president's childlike intransigence with regard
to the war in Iraq. But I am astonished at the Democratic leadership's
weakness and its failure to grasp the prevailing antiwar sentiment among the
citizens of this country.

There's never been a more appropriate moment for the emergence of a third
political party.

Jeffrey P. Bianchi

Douglas, Mich., Dec. 21, 2006

..

To the Editor:

When you believe in destiny, as President Bush does, the details don't
matter. "Victory" is inevitable and will come about one way or another.

But what happens when destiny turns out to be a delusion? We are seeing the
consequences now in Iraq.

Robert J. Inlow

Charlottesville, Va., Dec. 21, 2006


New York, Dec. 21, 2006

December 21, 2006
Editorial
Rudderless in Iraq
Anyone looking for new thinking on Iraq, or even candor, had to be
disappointed by President Bush's news conference yesterday. Mr. Bush may
want to defer unveiling his new strategy, but there will be no obliging
pause in Iraq's unraveling.

The latest Pentagon status report confirms a spiraling death toll, ever
deeper sectarian divisions and near total lawlessness on the streets of
Baghdad, despite repeated American vows to secure the capital. In a further
sign of Iraq's descent, our colleague James Glanz reported this week that
Baghdad gets less than seven hours of electricity a day, as insurgents and
looters dismantle the power grid.

While Mr. Bush contemplates his fast-disappearing options, competing
factions in the administration and the military have been less reticent
about floating their ideas. Some urge a sharp, temporary increase in
American troop strength in Baghdad. Others argue that Iraqi forces should
take the lead, whether or not they're ready. Still others talk about
different ways of reconfiguring Iraq's dysfunctional governing coalition.

The problem is not so much with the specific proposals - some deserve
serious consideration - as with the illusion that the political and military
components of American policy can be pursued in isolation from each other.
That is the kind of made-in-Washington tunnel vision that produced the
current disaster. Only a political strategy, embraced by Iraqis themselves
and backed by American military muscle, can have even a remote chance of
altering events, and even that may be too late.

Consider the talk of a temporary escalation of American forces to impose
some order in Baghdad. That is guaranteed to fail, unless it is tightly
integrated with a political strategy for producing an Iraqi government
finally willing to move against Shiite militias and open a dialogue on
national reconciliation. Without that, any temporary increase could slide
seamlessly into a permanent escalation - something America's depleted ground
forces cannot handle - with no chance of containing the chaos.

And while American diplomats report hints that Iraq's top Shiite cleric,
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, might be willing to support a genuine
national unity government, it remains unclear whether he would countenance
any loss of power for Shiite fundamentalists - and whether Washington has
any leverage left to influence his decision.

Yesterday, Mr. Bush acknowledged the obvious and desperate need to rebuild
America's overstretched ground forces, a subject he refrained from talking
about so long as Donald Rumsfeld ran the Pentagon. But that will take time
and won't be any help in Iraq. Mr. Bush also needs to acknowledge that his
course there has reached a dead end. He needs to quickly define a new
direction while he still has any choices left.



Jupiter Jones said:
"...without addressing the source"
I addressed the source by asking for your source.
You post without a reference then go on a wild tantrum when asked to
support what you have said.
the simple answer is for you to give a reference when making such a strong
statement.
But, you like the dramatic for reasons only known to you.

I finally found it after wading through your irrelevant rambling.

Whatever reason you brought Canadian politics into this is know only to
you since there is no relevance whatsoever.
I have no idea what so ever of your reason unless it is to further your
political agenda.
Similarly, you brought up American politics in your wild rant.

"Let me be perfectly clear. My objective..."
With all your political irrelevant garbage, you have done a great deal to
make your agenda clear as largely being political.
If you want to show otherwise, leave the political where it belongs and
that is clearly not here.

Your personal insults as well as your WRONG assumptions show your
character again.
If you had confidence in what you said, you would say it.
Instead, again you feel the need to shore up your position with personal
attacks.
Have someone else make your point, there are those able and more capable
than you.
Again you failed miserably.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


Chad Harris said:
The documentation is on public Vista Beta chats, and it is in the Vista
print TBT newsgroup and you currently have access to both Mr. Kimball.

LOL--Only someone named Mat Kimball who would adopt some comic strip name
Jupiter Jones for whatever reasons as his pen name would post garbage
like this, without addressing the source.

What would be appropriate is for the MSFT digital document team to fire
up an MSKB now that they've screwed the pooch and RTM's Vista on November
7, 2006and shipped Vista RTM to a lot of people and cannot unring this
bell.

Let me be perfectly clear. My objective is to help people who need their
printer, but don't care to take a lot of time to explore the software
printing with the drivers they have until months later when more drivers
that can help them are made available to MSFT by the printer
manufacturers and are on the printer manufacturer sites, instead of
meaningless statements that they will support Vista with when that will
happen intentionally not on HP or any other site.

I can't see every post on every group. I don't have time, and I'm not
going to configure message rules so that I get notified every time somone
replies to a post. I certainly have said this two or three times on this
group. The request for a reference (no doubt from you Mr. Kimball) has
not been ignored; I just didn't see it until now by accident. I am
delighted to give you a reference and several of us had repeated
constructive conversations on this very topic in detail on the TBT groups
with Tali Roth, Lead Program Manager of the Digital Documents team and I
know this subject was raised to members of that team at more than one
WHDC (Windows Hardware Engineering Course).

The erudite. and legally adept and very experienced litigator Mat Kimball
of Medicine Hat Canada posted to me:

"The Vista print team lied..."
You have said that before.
BUT when asked for a reference, you ignore the request.
Can you backup that statement?
If not, the statement is inappropriate and may even be illegal.

Really. Psst Mat. Let me help you. I know you're not legally
sophisticated but that's okay. The statement is appropriate although
perhaps you would have liked a more diplomatic word choice than "lied."
You would have liked "did not keep the promise they made repeatedly in
different venues to several of us during the TBT."

As in "the President of the United States and his team made some terrific
mistakes" instead of the reality that they continue to lie repeatedly
about a situation that is costing about 750 US lives per month and some
Canadian lives although the Canuks are getting the hell outta Dodge.

There is nothing "illegal" about what I said in the United States. I
don't really care much about Canadian law. I know Conrad Black from
Canada seems to care about U.S. Law because he's being put on trial by
the US attorney in March 2007 (I liked his book on Roosevelt actually)
and Jennifer Granholm Governor of Michigan, originally from Canada has to
contend with US law now.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2005/12/16/black-051216.html

Herrrrressss some Backup Mr. Mat Kanuk Kimball. It's my distinct pleasure
and there is more in content that is private and MSFT has requested not
to post. LOL to the 64th baby. I love these kind of wild ass ridiculous
challenges. Next time focus on the issue which is the port that will
help more printers print while using Windows Vista since my information
was it was made widely available to the public as a Beta many months ago
and is about to go on sale to the public around January 30, 2007 and is
on sale in the US now by volume licensing programs at Comp USA.

What was I trying to get done? I was trying to get more printers to
work. There are two major reasons why simple printers aren't working in
Vista right now--to stay away from sophisticated networking setups or
print setups in larger organizations.

One of them is that people try to load drivers before they get the
hardware recognized by either XP or Vista. That's unfortunate and it's
unfortunate that directions from manufactures often say to do this. It
produces a "false positive 16 bit subsystem error." I call it false
positive because there really is not a 16 bit sub system problem

The other is that XP drivers (many but not all of them) or earlier
drivers can and will work on Vista if you go to the Printer Port tab as
I've outlined, and you use the pulldown to check Virtual USB Port instead
of the defaulted LPT port or Com ports.

1) In the first place it's as intriguing that Jupiter Jones aka Mat
Kimball doesn't address the real issue of trying to get more printers up
and running for users of this group and users of Windows Vista.
Defaulting to a parallel port when USB cords have been standard and
faster and more efficient for a panoply of reasons for nearly ten years
or more. I have gotten scroes of printers working on boxes by changing
their ports who are using XP drivers because their printer manufacturer
has not 1) made drivers for Vista yet on their site or 2) as some have
given MSFT any drivers for their recent printer.

2) It amuses me that Mat Kimball lol instead of focusing on the issue
(bring it Mat on the virtues of defaulting a parallel printer port on
January 30. 2007 when some Vista public purchases could take place of
so-called RTM Vista with scores of MSKBs now that say "we know it's a
problem and we don't have a clue how to fix it" seems to get satisfaction
out of "demanding documentation" when nearly every post I do has a link
or substantive documentation.

However, I have emails and posts on the Vista TBT newsgroups where a
group of us raised this issue and were promised explicitly this would be
changed. It was not. Check out the default port on the port tab for
Windows Vista RTM and you'll see they did not change it. Technically
MSFT has asked that TBT newsgroup content not be posted, so I'll honor
that. However, I can post this from a Vista Beta Print Chat where I
raised the question. It just does not have the detail or the gang of us
that made the point to the print team that it is ludicrous to default a
parallel port and it costs a lot of unwitting users the use of their
printer. We have scores of people pleading for printer drivers they don't
have yet on this group.

From a Vista Print chat, and I have transcripts of every Beta chat but I
am going to use a web link so that it can be accessed by anyone. You can
find this exchange in this Vista TBT Print Chat. Permission has been
given repeatedly by MSFT to post these chats on the web so don't get
your sigmoid colon spazzed into a several knots over this.
___________________________________________________________________
Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think
is much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately
versus not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still preferrring
LPT1. That is a mistake to list LPT1 as
the preferred port because 1) More XP drivers will work if people use
USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is ***not the preferred port. It is less
than preferred unless you don't want some printers to work in Vista. Alan
Morris said they would consider this on Print Team and have been and is
their an update?"selection for LPT is due to the fact that USB devices
are supposed to Plug and Play and customers don't have to run the Add
Printer Wizard to select the port and add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't know Canadianese that well. It's a brand of English where you can
always tell the Canuk by their pronunciation of key words. However, in
my country generally when someone says "We're working on fixing this
one--the Add Printer Wizard will not suggest lpt as the default port" and
that someone is from the Vista print team, it pretty much means what it
says and this promise again, was not kept.

CH
 
C

Chad Harris

Mike, In fact, better behavior for Microsoft would have been to make a much
better effort to get drivers incorporated into Vista that made devices work.
Auchin gushes about 19, 500 and yet I see hundreds of posts on every group
and forum that drivers don't work.

I pointed out on another thread where the Vista Print team members agreed
with me that it was a mistake to default a parallel printer port when the
bell shaped curve of users never know how to tweak their printer port
because it would cause their printers not to work and after promising to fix
this, they did not in RTM.

And again if one looks at the 200 plus MSKBs now on Vista, many of them
acknowledge bugs they were told about early in 2005 that they refused to fix
for public release in 2007.

CH
 
D

Dale

I'm not saying there are not a lot of bugs or flaws in Vista. There are.
But in any development project you have to prioritize and work your way down
the list until you run out of time and budget. While I could list dozens of
things that would be different in Vista if there were no budget or time
constraints, if that lack of constraint existed, there'd be no Vista;
there's always another bug or feature. Projects without both time and
budget limits are destined to fail.

To me, the important thing is that the Vista product team listened and
considered the suggestion. Who knows what worse flaw may have been left in
Vista had they done the printer port fix? Because they listen and consider
customer feedback, Vista is better for it. The Windows Media Player product
team could have learned a lot from the Vista team in this regard.

Dale

Chad Harris said:
Again, Telus Mr. Kimball (it takes a real chisel to get though that thick
skull) Mat :--

Where's your comment on enabling more people to be able to use their
printers NOW in Vista and these discussions took place in May nearly 8
months and many builds ago. This is a quintissential example of Vista
teams having tin ears and making Vista a lot worse than it could have
been. The parallels are in the appendix.

Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think is
much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately
versus not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still preferrring
LPT1. That is a mistake to list LPT1 asthe preferred port because 1) More
XP drivers will work if people use USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is
***not the preferred port. It is less than preferred unless you don't want
some printers to work in Vista. Alan Morris said they would consider this
on Print Team and have been and is their an update?"selection for LPT is
due to the fact that USB devices are supposed to Plug and Play and
customers don't have to run the Add Printer Wizard to select the port and
add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.

*******In fact, Vista RTM out of the box has LPT as its default port and
they didn't "work on fixing this one."

Again they were reminded of discussions on the group:


Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):
Q: And as KoZe pointed out on the thread the number of printers coming to
mkt with an LPT1 port is diminishing for home printers.
A: We're aware of this :) We're changing the Add Printer Wizard.

******In fact Vista RTM out of the box has LPT as its default prot and
they didn't change it.

There were a number of other discussions with them in the newsgroup and
with Tali Roth PM of the Digital Print team at MSFT. They were acutely
aware of it. They didn't touch the default Printer port after saying they
would change it.

1) The issue was simply how to help people use their printers. I don't
see one word from you that has to do with printers on this thread and it's
so typical. Back in the day, Matt Kimball aka Jupiter Jones concentrated
on Windows issues. Now apparently some components of male menopause have
taken over your pyche.

I knew the way. MSFT agreed. MSFT didn't follow through and their were
several discussions and they heard from others in the same vein. Half of
the MSKBs I see right now were bugs.

As I said prepeatedly, they were told that switching from a default
parallel port to a USB port would enable more printers to work out of the
box. They agreed and then for reasons I can't guess did not do what they
said they were going to do. You didn't address that. You asked for
proof. You have it.

Did I mention more older drivers (that aren't modded or made for Vista
specifically) since many companies are dragging their feet will work if
you changed printer ports? Maybe if HP had focused more on driver
development than eavsdropping on their employees they could have had the
time and money to develop drivers a thousand times over.

2) I didn't wade into Canadian politics. They really aren't a prime
concern. My references that
Americans are apathetic and their President is running them into the
ground as long as they stay apathetic are no more frequent than quotes
people sign with.

CH
____________

Appendix:

To the Editor December 23, 2006 NYTimes

Re "Rudderless in Iraq" (editorial, Dec. 21):

It is time someone pointed out that while the American public and the
press allow this president to reconsider, gather data, conduct a listening
tour and generally stonewall, every single day, some mother will bury her
son and a child will say a final farewell to a father.

There is a real cost in lives, both American and Iraqi, that we deny
utterly.

We have to leave, now. Otherwise, the president should get on a plane, fly
to Baghdad, look the people in the eye and select which ones he is
prepared to sacrifice in his war.

Fellow citizens, where's the outrage? Nancy Hughes

San Francisco, Dec. 21, 2006


To the Editor:

On Nov. 7, the American electorate gave the government a clear directive
to withdraw United States troops from Iraq. Six weeks later, as you say in
your editorial, President Bush and his administration are contemplating
sending more troops to Iraq.

In other words, not only will the directive given to the president by the
electorate be completely ignored, but exactly the opposite is being
contemplated.

It is difficult to imagine any other action that President Bush could take
that so clearly demonstrates his contempt for democratic processes as
outlined in the Constitution he swore to uphold.

Worse, in addition to the problematic issues raised in your editorial,
increasing troop strength by 10 percent will have only a marginal effect,
but Mr. Bush seems simply to lack the ability to move in a new direction,
so we are stuck as he makes the same mistakes again and again.

Ernest L. Mehler

To the Editor:

On Nov. 7, the American electorate gave the government a clear directive
to withdraw United States troops from Iraq. Six weeks later, as you say in
your editorial, President Bush and his administration are contemplating
sending more troops to Iraq.

In other words, not only will the directive given to the president by the
electorate be completely ignored, but exactly the opposite is being
contemplated.

It is difficult to imagine any other action that President Bush could take
that so clearly demonstrates his contempt for democratic processes as
outlined in the Constitution he swore to uphold.

Worse, in addition to the problematic issues raised in your editorial,
increasing troop strength by 10 percent will have only a marginal effect,
but Mr. Bush seems simply to lack the ability to move in a new direction,
so we are stuck as he makes the same mistakes again and again.

Ernest L. Mehler

New York, Dec. 21, 2006



To the Editor:

I have become inured to the president's childlike intransigence with
regard to the war in Iraq. But I am astonished at the Democratic
leadership's weakness and its failure to grasp the prevailing antiwar
sentiment among the citizens of this country.

There's never been a more appropriate moment for the emergence of a third
political party.

Jeffrey P. Bianchi

Douglas, Mich., Dec. 21, 2006

.

To the Editor:

When you believe in destiny, as President Bush does, the details don't
matter. "Victory" is inevitable and will come about one way or another.

But what happens when destiny turns out to be a delusion? We are seeing
the consequences now in Iraq.

Robert J. Inlow

Charlottesville, Va., Dec. 21, 2006


New York, Dec. 21, 2006

December 21, 2006
Editorial
Rudderless in Iraq
Anyone looking for new thinking on Iraq, or even candor, had to be
disappointed by President Bush's news conference yesterday. Mr. Bush may
want to defer unveiling his new strategy, but there will be no obliging
pause in Iraq's unraveling.

The latest Pentagon status report confirms a spiraling death toll, ever
deeper sectarian divisions and near total lawlessness on the streets of
Baghdad, despite repeated American vows to secure the capital. In a
further sign of Iraq's descent, our colleague James Glanz reported this
week that Baghdad gets less than seven hours of electricity a day, as
insurgents and looters dismantle the power grid.

While Mr. Bush contemplates his fast-disappearing options, competing
factions in the administration and the military have been less reticent
about floating their ideas. Some urge a sharp, temporary increase in
American troop strength in Baghdad. Others argue that Iraqi forces should
take the lead, whether or not they're ready. Still others talk about
different ways of reconfiguring Iraq's dysfunctional governing coalition.

The problem is not so much with the specific proposals - some deserve
serious consideration - as with the illusion that the political and
military components of American policy can be pursued in isolation from
each other. That is the kind of made-in-Washington tunnel vision that
produced the current disaster. Only a political strategy, embraced by
Iraqis themselves and backed by American military muscle, can have even a
remote chance of altering events, and even that may be too late.

Consider the talk of a temporary escalation of American forces to impose
some order in Baghdad. That is guaranteed to fail, unless it is tightly
integrated with a political strategy for producing an Iraqi government
finally willing to move against Shiite militias and open a dialogue on
national reconciliation. Without that, any temporary increase could slide
seamlessly into a permanent escalation - something America's depleted
ground forces cannot handle - with no chance of containing the chaos.

And while American diplomats report hints that Iraq's top Shiite cleric,
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, might be willing to support a genuine
national unity government, it remains unclear whether he would countenance
any loss of power for Shiite fundamentalists - and whether Washington has
any leverage left to influence his decision.

Yesterday, Mr. Bush acknowledged the obvious and desperate need to rebuild
America's overstretched ground forces, a subject he refrained from talking
about so long as Donald Rumsfeld ran the Pentagon. But that will take time
and won't be any help in Iraq. Mr. Bush also needs to acknowledge that his
course there has reached a dead end. He needs to quickly define a new
direction while he still has any choices left.



Jupiter Jones said:
"...without addressing the source"
I addressed the source by asking for your source.
You post without a reference then go on a wild tantrum when asked to
support what you have said.
the simple answer is for you to give a reference when making such a
strong statement.
But, you like the dramatic for reasons only known to you.

I finally found it after wading through your irrelevant rambling.

Whatever reason you brought Canadian politics into this is know only to
you since there is no relevance whatsoever.
I have no idea what so ever of your reason unless it is to further your
political agenda.
Similarly, you brought up American politics in your wild rant.

"Let me be perfectly clear. My objective..."
With all your political irrelevant garbage, you have done a great deal to
make your agenda clear as largely being political.
If you want to show otherwise, leave the political where it belongs and
that is clearly not here.

Your personal insults as well as your WRONG assumptions show your
character again.
If you had confidence in what you said, you would say it.
Instead, again you feel the need to shore up your position with personal
attacks.
Have someone else make your point, there are those able and more capable
than you.
Again you failed miserably.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


Chad Harris said:
The documentation is on public Vista Beta chats, and it is in the Vista
print TBT newsgroup and you currently have access to both Mr. Kimball.

LOL--Only someone named Mat Kimball who would adopt some comic strip
name Jupiter Jones for whatever reasons as his pen name would post
garbage like this, without addressing the source.

What would be appropriate is for the MSFT digital document team to fire
up an MSKB now that they've screwed the pooch and RTM's Vista on
November 7, 2006and shipped Vista RTM to a lot of people and cannot
unring this bell.

Let me be perfectly clear. My objective is to help people who need their
printer, but don't care to take a lot of time to explore the software
printing with the drivers they have until months later when more drivers
that can help them are made available to MSFT by the printer
manufacturers and are on the printer manufacturer sites, instead of
meaningless statements that they will support Vista with when that will
happen intentionally not on HP or any other site.

I can't see every post on every group. I don't have time, and I'm not
going to configure message rules so that I get notified every time
somone replies to a post. I certainly have said this two or three times
on this group. The request for a reference (no doubt from you Mr.
Kimball) has not been ignored; I just didn't see it until now by
accident. I am delighted to give you a reference and several of us had
repeated constructive conversations on this very topic in detail on the
TBT groups with Tali Roth, Lead Program Manager of the Digital Documents
team and I know this subject was raised to members of that team at more
than one WHDC (Windows Hardware Engineering Course).

The erudite. and legally adept and very experienced litigator Mat
Kimball of Medicine Hat Canada posted to me:

"The Vista print team lied..."
You have said that before.
BUT when asked for a reference, you ignore the request.
Can you backup that statement?
If not, the statement is inappropriate and may even be illegal.

Really. Psst Mat. Let me help you. I know you're not legally
sophisticated but that's okay. The statement is appropriate although
perhaps you would have liked a more diplomatic word choice than "lied."
You would have liked "did not keep the promise they made repeatedly in
different venues to several of us during the TBT."

As in "the President of the United States and his team made some
terrific mistakes" instead of the reality that they continue to lie
repeatedly about a situation that is costing about 750 US lives per
month and some Canadian lives although the Canuks are getting the hell
outta Dodge.

There is nothing "illegal" about what I said in the United States. I
don't really care much about Canadian law. I know Conrad Black from
Canada seems to care about U.S. Law because he's being put on trial by
the US attorney in March 2007 (I liked his book on Roosevelt actually)
and Jennifer Granholm Governor of Michigan, originally from Canada has
to contend with US law now.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2005/12/16/black-051216.html

Herrrrressss some Backup Mr. Mat Kanuk Kimball. It's my distinct
pleasure and there is more in content that is private and MSFT has
requested not to post. LOL to the 64th baby. I love these kind of wild
ass ridiculous challenges. Next time focus on the issue which is the
port that will help more printers print while using Windows Vista since
my information was it was made widely available to the public as a Beta
many months ago and is about to go on sale to the public around January
30, 2007 and is on sale in the US now by volume licensing programs at
Comp USA.

What was I trying to get done? I was trying to get more printers to
work. There are two major reasons why simple printers aren't working in
Vista right now--to stay away from sophisticated networking setups or
print setups in larger organizations.

One of them is that people try to load drivers before they get the
hardware recognized by either XP or Vista. That's unfortunate and it's
unfortunate that directions from manufactures often say to do this. It
produces a "false positive 16 bit subsystem error." I call it false
positive because there really is not a 16 bit sub system problem

The other is that XP drivers (many but not all of them) or earlier
drivers can and will work on Vista if you go to the Printer Port tab as
I've outlined, and you use the pulldown to check Virtual USB Port
instead of the defaulted LPT port or Com ports.

1) In the first place it's as intriguing that Jupiter Jones aka Mat
Kimball doesn't address the real issue of trying to get more printers up
and running for users of this group and users of Windows Vista.
Defaulting to a parallel port when USB cords have been standard and
faster and more efficient for a panoply of reasons for nearly ten years
or more. I have gotten scroes of printers working on boxes by changing
their ports who are using XP drivers because their printer manufacturer
has not 1) made drivers for Vista yet on their site or 2) as some have
given MSFT any drivers for their recent printer.

2) It amuses me that Mat Kimball lol instead of focusing on the issue
(bring it Mat on the virtues of defaulting a parallel printer port on
January 30. 2007 when some Vista public purchases could take place of
so-called RTM Vista with scores of MSKBs now that say "we know it's a
problem and we don't have a clue how to fix it" seems to get
satisfaction out of "demanding documentation" when nearly every post I
do has a link or substantive documentation.

However, I have emails and posts on the Vista TBT newsgroups where a
group of us raised this issue and were promised explicitly this would be
changed. It was not. Check out the default port on the port tab for
Windows Vista RTM and you'll see they did not change it. Technically
MSFT has asked that TBT newsgroup content not be posted, so I'll honor
that. However, I can post this from a Vista Beta Print Chat where I
raised the question. It just does not have the detail or the gang of us
that made the point to the print team that it is ludicrous to default a
parallel port and it costs a lot of unwitting users the use of their
printer. We have scores of people pleading for printer drivers they
don't have yet on this group.

From a Vista Print chat, and I have transcripts of every Beta chat but I
am going to use a web link so that it can be accessed by anyone. You can
find this exchange in this Vista TBT Print Chat. Permission has been
given repeatedly by MSFT to post these chats on the web so don't get
your sigmoid colon spazzed into a several knots over this.
___________________________________________________________________
Chat Topic: Printing - General
Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2006
http://windowsconnected.com/forums/thread/3160.aspx

Frank Olivier [MSFT] (Expert):

Q: I lobbied and want to continue Lobbying you all for a change I think
is much needed and will help a lot of people's printers work immediately
versus not. You all have the pulldown for printer port still
preferrring LPT1. That is a mistake to list LPT1 as
the preferred port because 1) More XP drivers will work if people use
USB2Virtual as the port so LPT1 is ***not the preferred port. It is less
than preferred unless you don't want some printers to work in Vista.
Alan Morris said they would consider this on Print Team and have been
and is their an update?"selection for LPT is due to the fact that USB
devices are supposed to Plug and Play and customers don't have to run
the Add Printer Wizard to select the port and add the printer"


A: We're working on fixing this one - the Add Printer Wizard will not
suggest lpt as the default port.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't know Canadianese that well. It's a brand of English where you
can always tell the Canuk by their pronunciation of key words. However,
in my country generally when someone says "We're working on fixing this
one--the Add Printer Wizard will not suggest lpt as the default port"
and that someone is from the Vista print team, it pretty much means what
it says and this promise again, was not kept.

CH
 
F

Frank

Chad said:
Again, Telus Mr. Kimball (it takes a real chisel to get though that
thick skull) Mat :--

Chad, there is a definite lesson to be learned from your response:
"less is more"...compare the two speakers at Gettysburg and ask yourself
which one, which orator, which speech do you remember? Which one lost
his audience because of the sheer length of his message?
Diatribitis can be overcome, but only if you're willing.
A swift kick is much more effective than a long beating.
Wise up, you may a lot offer...maybe.
Frank
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top