D
V
Vic
Good one!
After using Windows for about twenty years, after ALL the BAD reviews
and consumer complaints about ALL-KINDS-OF-STUFF on Vista, I won't go
near it!
Wake-up Micro$oft
___
After using Windows for about twenty years, after ALL the BAD reviews
and consumer complaints about ALL-KINDS-OF-STUFF on Vista, I won't go
near it!
Wake-up Micro$oft
___
F
Frank
David said:
hehehe...what's wrong dave...Vista got you down? You've been beaten by
Vista...can't figure it out?...LOL!
Frank
M
Mike Hall - MVP
Vic said:
Then you maybe missing out..
D
David
I have plenty of company, judging from all the press and first hand
accounts I've read, of issues with one of the lamest releases of Windoze
since Windoze Me.
Dave
P
PNutts
XP SP3 certainly makes things interesting. I've gone back and forth between
Vista and XP in the past year but still land on Vista as it is rock solid for
me. Both systems benefit greatly from their respective SPs. I'm lazy and like
to slipstream the SP into the install media, so I'll look forward to when
that is available from Microsoft (as they designed it) for Vista.
I don't want to knock XP too hard, but a fresh makes me remember how many
"quirks" it has. Always more tweaks than I remember. Not so for Vista, good
to go out of the box for me.
Vista and XP in the past year but still land on Vista as it is rock solid for
me. Both systems benefit greatly from their respective SPs. I'm lazy and like
to slipstream the SP into the install media, so I'll look forward to when
that is available from Microsoft (as they designed it) for Vista.
I don't want to knock XP too hard, but a fresh makes me remember how many
"quirks" it has. Always more tweaks than I remember. Not so for Vista, good
to go out of the box for me.
N
Not Me
Some of us have figured it out, we also figured out that we dislike it.
That is why there are dozens of brands of automobiles, clothing, shoes,
furniture, TVs, computers...everyone has different tastes.
That doesn't make everyone who disagrees with YOUR tastes an idiot!
But, it certainly says something about YOUR maturity level.
That is why there are dozens of brands of automobiles, clothing, shoes,
furniture, TVs, computers...everyone has different tastes.
That doesn't make everyone who disagrees with YOUR tastes an idiot!
But, it certainly says something about YOUR maturity level.
D
David
wish i could say such nice things about Vista. It's given me plenty toPNutts said:
gripe about. oh well, at least it looks nice...
Dave
B
Bob
Well I have tried both Vista Business and now that I have a lean mean
fighting machine I am now using Vista Ultimate. Except for a few changes with
Windows Explorer that I'm still getting used to I have found it to be a
really good O/S.
If you remember back when Windows for Workgroups changed to Windows 95 there
were similar complaints which as we know in time were sorted out.
Some people say that Vista is slower than XP, but how quick can you blink?
If your old enough to remember DOS 3, DOS 4.01 and DOS 5 you would notice
that things these days are far better ( Except for ME of course ) lolol
Having spent over a year reading comments on this site the conclusion I come
to is either people have the wrong hardware or are too busy picking holes in
Vista that they miss what it can really do. Whether you believe in Moore's
Law or Murphy's Law or even Wang's Law ( Wangs Law says that Murphy is an
optimist ) Technology and software are at the stage where they are
continually outdoing each other and until that reaches a point where they
aren't competing against each other you will always have conflicts of one
sort or another.
fighting machine I am now using Vista Ultimate. Except for a few changes with
Windows Explorer that I'm still getting used to I have found it to be a
really good O/S.
If you remember back when Windows for Workgroups changed to Windows 95 there
were similar complaints which as we know in time were sorted out.
Some people say that Vista is slower than XP, but how quick can you blink?
If your old enough to remember DOS 3, DOS 4.01 and DOS 5 you would notice
that things these days are far better ( Except for ME of course ) lolol
Having spent over a year reading comments on this site the conclusion I come
to is either people have the wrong hardware or are too busy picking holes in
Vista that they miss what it can really do. Whether you believe in Moore's
Law or Murphy's Law or even Wang's Law ( Wangs Law says that Murphy is an
optimist ) Technology and software are at the stage where they are
continually outdoing each other and until that reaches a point where they
aren't competing against each other you will always have conflicts of one
sort or another.
D
David
Bob said:
I started in 1985, so that was DOS 3 something, right? I like 6.22 a
lot. MS did a nice job on that one. and i went with Win 3.1, 95, 98SE,
XP, and a sideways step with Vista.
VISTA: start up is soooo slow with Vista. Shut down is
problematic--about 25% of the time it gets stuck on the shutdown screen
and i have to hit the power switch. Resuming from sleep and hibernation
is a crap shoot, also. I decided to stick with Office 2003 because not
only does it load in that oft quoted "blink of an eye", but I like it
better than bloated 2007. I think MS should make an OS that considers
SPEED to be a worthy goal, instead of feature creep. creep? hell, it's
more like a freefall towards infinite features. There is much to be
said for the principal of KISS.
Dave
P
PNutts
I had a date like that once...
D
David
HAHA! Good one!PNutts said:I had a date like that once...
Dave
P
Powell
Hi Guys:
I was just browsing through to post a question when I came upon your
discussions. I have been running Vista since early in February and I find it
head and shoulders above XP. In fact, I switched to Vista because I had
reinstalled the XP O/S so many times that Microsoft finally shut me down. The
reason for all the reinstallations was an internal XP problem related to SP2
and that junk AV software from Norton. After an initial attempt at
downloading SP2, my computer froze solid when Norton blew past my 'notify
before download' setting and started a download of an update at the same
time. Thereafter, I decided to ignore SP2 until Microsoft got their act
together and set both MS updates and Norton to 'notify before downloading' I
might just as well have saved myself the trouble. Each one would take turns
kicking in and it would trigger the other one. That problem was a
Microsoft/Norton internal problem. With Vista, the problems come from
incompatibility with non-MS applications and that is the fault of the
software developers. The software has to be made compatible with the
O/S...not the other way around. In spite of what developers like the dolts at
Nero think, the tail does not wag the dog. And yes, Vista has its problems,
but with over a million lines of code that is to be expected. And yes,
Microsoft is an arrogant, sloppy company when it comes to fixing glitches in
their system. But try i-Mac like I did and you'll be glad to get back to
Vista. i-Mac is a beautiful machine but, like Norton, their philosophy comes
straight from the Nazi handbook..."Your computer belongs to me and you vill
do it my vay or ve vill shut you down." A word of advice...don't trust any
updates from Microsoft except for Windows Defender. Don't download them until
you check with "Ask Woody.com" where the updates are rigorously monitored and
you can find out about any problems that other users are having before you
try to install them.
Regards gents
Powell
I was just browsing through to post a question when I came upon your
discussions. I have been running Vista since early in February and I find it
head and shoulders above XP. In fact, I switched to Vista because I had
reinstalled the XP O/S so many times that Microsoft finally shut me down. The
reason for all the reinstallations was an internal XP problem related to SP2
and that junk AV software from Norton. After an initial attempt at
downloading SP2, my computer froze solid when Norton blew past my 'notify
before download' setting and started a download of an update at the same
time. Thereafter, I decided to ignore SP2 until Microsoft got their act
together and set both MS updates and Norton to 'notify before downloading' I
might just as well have saved myself the trouble. Each one would take turns
kicking in and it would trigger the other one. That problem was a
Microsoft/Norton internal problem. With Vista, the problems come from
incompatibility with non-MS applications and that is the fault of the
software developers. The software has to be made compatible with the
O/S...not the other way around. In spite of what developers like the dolts at
Nero think, the tail does not wag the dog. And yes, Vista has its problems,
but with over a million lines of code that is to be expected. And yes,
Microsoft is an arrogant, sloppy company when it comes to fixing glitches in
their system. But try i-Mac like I did and you'll be glad to get back to
Vista. i-Mac is a beautiful machine but, like Norton, their philosophy comes
straight from the Nazi handbook..."Your computer belongs to me and you vill
do it my vay or ve vill shut you down." A word of advice...don't trust any
updates from Microsoft except for Windows Defender. Don't download them until
you check with "Ask Woody.com" where the updates are rigorously monitored and
you can find out about any problems that other users are having before you
try to install them.
Regards gents
Powell
N
Not Me
Windows for Workgroups to W95?
I thought W3.11 was followed by NT.
W3.1 was followed by W95.
With either one, I could see the improvements.
Vista claims improvements, but I don't see much.
I don't have any trouble getting Vista to work, I just don't like what they
have done with it.
It feels like hopping out of an '08 Escalade and into a '03 Corsica...
The Vista lovers may disagree, but that is my take.
I thought W3.11 was followed by NT.
W3.1 was followed by W95.
With either one, I could see the improvements.
Vista claims improvements, but I don't see much.
I don't have any trouble getting Vista to work, I just don't like what they
have done with it.
It feels like hopping out of an '08 Escalade and into a '03 Corsica...
The Vista lovers may disagree, but that is my take.
T
the wharf rat
I actually don't remember that at all. I never met one single
person who actually thought 3.11 was better than 95 in any way. I was
supporting a development group in those days and I had a queue about
3 weeks long of people requesting upgrades.
Same with 98. Big improvement over 95. People had bad things
to say about the eventual switch to 2000 because it was NT and not the
old "consumer windows".
Ummm, well, "better" as in "I've got more storage on my cell phone
than I did in my first lab" sure. But "better" as in "my software vendor
actually gives a good goddam what I think about their product"? Hmmmm.
BTW, what's the difference between technology and software?
T
the wharf rat
I think MS should make an OS that considers
SPEED to be a worthy goal, instead of feature creep. creep? hell, it's
more like a freefall towards infinite features. There is much to be
said for the principal of KISS.
IMHO Microsoft's critical error is that they forgot that an operating
system is a meta-tool, something that lets you use other tools. They've
turned the OS into...another application...one that just happens to have
access to hardware. Bye bye to what should be a simple io multiplexor and
hello marketing-driven feature creep and cover-our-ass catering to whatever
legal pressure gets the CTO's attention over lunch.
The operating system should be useless of itself but should permit
the infinite use of an infinite toolset. Windows does everything with
some built in approximation of the tool you want but doesn't let you do
anything that isn't already built in. Can you imagine Larry Wall having
invented Perl on Windows???
T
the wharf rat
3.11 and NT were coexistant. 3.11 was replaced by 95 (3.11 was
just 3.1 with networking...) and NT became NT 4.0 then 2000.
D
David
Very well said. Windows SHOULD be considered a means to an end.the said:
Somehow that idea got lost along the way, I'm afraid.
Dave
X
xfile
Hi Mike,
Has IBM figured out for why they lost PC OS battle to MS?
Or, why they eventually had to sell PC business to its OEM/subcontractor
which is the biggest joke in PC history?
Did you help the company same way as you are helping MS now?
Has IBM figured out for why they lost PC OS battle to MS?
Or, why they eventually had to sell PC business to its OEM/subcontractor
which is the biggest joke in PC history?
Did you help the company same way as you are helping MS now?
R
Rich
Wake up Vic, I'll bet you believe in global warming too.
to quote Plato .. "you've been had"
Rich
to quote Plato .. "you've been had"
Rich