Windows Vista and shells (Can you replace Explorer.exe?)

[Guest]

Well the concept of using a shell may be a mute point or a bit confusing for
people who have only used Windows and never studied computing in general
(Unix in paticular), but I have finally ran into a Windows version I do not
like; Vista. Does anyone seriously technical know how to replace the current
shell (I assume it is still Explorer.exe) with XP's shell?

Does anyone know if there is a 3rd party that has created a shell that
mimics XP? I would assume they would support their product and it is worth
paying for.

Does anyone know of another OS that will be supported going into the future
that mimics XP enough to switch to it? All suggestions for OSes are fair
game. I just need to know why you think it is easy to use & powerful. It
must also be able to be centrally controlled and can work with Windows
Servers. My main goal is to save $$ by not purchasing Vista licenses with
new hardware and migrating to another OS that is easy for staff that do not
know how to use XP that well.

phy

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well the concept of using a shell may be a mute point or a bit confusing for
people who have only used Windows and never studied computing in general
(Unix in paticular), but I have finally ran into a Windows version I do not
like; Vista. Does anyone seriously technical know how to replace the current
shell (I assume it is still Explorer.exe) with XP's shell?

Does anyone know if there is a 3rd party that has created a shell that
mimics XP? I would assume they would support their product and it is worth
paying for.

Does anyone know of another OS that will be supported going into the future
that mimics XP enough to switch to it? All suggestions for OSes are fair
game. I just need to know why you think it is easy to use & powerful. It
must also be able to be centrally controlled and can work with Windows
Servers. My main goal is to save $$ by not purchasing Vista licenses with
new hardware and migrating to another OS that is easy for staff that do not
know how to use XP that well.

Well one suggestion I'd have for you is Kubuntu as it uses the KDE Desktop
which mimics the XP Desktop in general look and feel. Anyone that can move
a mouse and click on things can use it.

Define "Can work with Windows Servers"? What does it need to do? Accessing
shared directories on windows servers is no problem.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Guest]

there are ways to make vista look like xp...but to that you need several
apps- replacments, one for the theme, one for windows explorer....

and indeed you can use other shells with vista just like you could with xp,
but its not for newbie's..

the new kde 4 theoretically will run natively on windows too

 

[Guest]

his question is valid and you are an invalid

Do us all a favor, and just GO AWAY.

 

[Lang Murphy]

Well the concept of using a shell may be a mute point or a bit confusing
for
people who have only used Windows and never studied computing in general
(Unix in paticular), but I have finally ran into a Windows version I do
not
like; Vista. Does anyone seriously technical know how to replace the
current
shell (I assume it is still Explorer.exe) with XP's shell?

Does anyone know if there is a 3rd party that has created a shell that
mimics XP? I would assume they would support their product and it is
worth
paying for.

Does anyone know of another OS that will be supported going into the
future
that mimics XP enough to switch to it? All suggestions for OSes are fair
game. I just need to know why you think it is easy to use & powerful. It
must also be able to be centrally controlled and can work with Windows
Servers. My main goal is to save $$ by not purchasing Vista licenses with
new hardware and migrating to another OS that is easy for staff that do
not
know how to use XP that well.

phy

Have you tried using Classic View? You can set that up for the Start Menu,
Control Panel, set the theme to classic, and change folders to Classic View.
Have you tried any of them?

I think I've seen references to 3rd party shells for Vista in this NG. I
don't have any recommendations though, because I happen to like Vista's UI
and Explorer. (That doesn't mean I'm saying you should like it... not at
all...)

Ah, easy to use. There's the rub. My personal experience with Linux, most
recently Ubuntu, is that, yes, it's easy to use, right up to the point where
it's -not- easy to use. And when it's -not- easy to use, man, you better
have an Ubuntu SME on your payroll or you're going to be spending a lot of
time in the Ubuntu forum. (And that's NOT a knock on Ubuntu... I ain't
saying don't try it... just saying: don't think you're gonna install Ubuntu
and life will be trouble free from that point on... anyone that argues that
point is ill informed, imho. Or just ill. LOL!)

Lang

 

[Stephan Rose]

Ah, easy to use. There's the rub. My personal experience with Linux, most
recently Ubuntu, is that, yes, it's easy to use, right up to the point where
it's -not- easy to use. And when it's -not- easy to use, man, you better
have an Ubuntu SME on your payroll or you're going to be spending a lot of
time in the Ubuntu forum. (And that's NOT a knock on Ubuntu... I ain't
saying don't try it... just saying: don't think you're gonna install Ubuntu
and life will be trouble free from that point on... anyone that argues that
point is ill informed, imho. Or just ill. LOL!)

Well I am going to argue that point and I've been using it all year.
Matter of fact, since running it on my work computer my blood pressure has
gone way down! =) I'm calm...relaxed...everything works...everything is
fast...responsive...no errors...no issues...no problems....it is kinda
nice. =) And as an added bonus, I get to actually do some work instead of
scanning for viruses, adware, spyware and defragging my drives.

Personally, I love it . =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Guest]

This is a Vista Newsgroup cockhead!

his question is valid and you are an invalid

 

[Lang Murphy]

Well I am going to argue that point and I've been using it all year.
Matter of fact, since running it on my work computer my blood pressure has
gone way down! =) I'm calm...relaxed...everything works...everything is
fast...responsive...no errors...no issues...no problems....it is kinda
nice. =) And as an added bonus, I get to actually do some work instead of
scanning for viruses, adware, spyware and defragging my drives.

Personally, I love it . =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Stephen,

I won't argue that point with you. (That you're a happy camper... how could
I?) What I will point out, however, is that you are, quite obviously, an
experienced Linux user. There's a world of difference between experienced
Linux users, like yourself, and inexperienced Linux users, like myself,
dealing with problems that might crop up on a Linux system. Night and day.
Absolutely no doubt it's easy for you. Absolutely no doubt it's not as easy
for me. Not by a long shot.

As previously stated: -not- knocking Ubuntu (or Linux in general).

Lang

 

[Frank]

Stephen,

I won't argue that point with you. (That you're a happy camper... how
could I?) What I will point out, however, is that you are, quite
obviously, an experienced Linux user. There's a world of difference
between experienced Linux users, like yourself, and inexperienced Linux
users, like myself, dealing with problems that might crop up on a Linux
system. Night and day. Absolutely no doubt it's easy for you. Absolutely
no doubt it's not as easy for me. Not by a long shot.

As previously stated: -not- knocking Ubuntu (or Linux in general).

Lang

Well the "rub" for some linux users is that they still need ms in order
to make money.
Free does have certain disadvantages.
Frank

 

[Stephan Rose]

Stephen,

I won't argue that point with you. (That you're a happy camper... how could
I?) What I will point out, however, is that you are, quite obviously, an
experienced Linux user. There's a world of difference between experienced
Linux users, like yourself, and inexperienced Linux users, like myself,
dealing with problems that might crop up on a Linux system. Night and day.
Absolutely no doubt it's easy for you. Absolutely no doubt it's not as easy
for me. Not by a long shot.

True, I might be somewhat experienced now. I wasn't though in the
beginning of this year. I had never touched a Linux OS until MS released
Vista. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well the "rub" for some linux users is that they still need ms in order
to make money.
Free does have certain disadvantages.

The "rub" more likely is that I actually have to *support* ms' operating
system. It's not that I "need" it, it's just that people use it and
therefore I have to support it.

If I go by "need", I have very little for it. I am down to a single
application that I need maybe once or twice a year on average for a couple
weeks.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Lang Murphy]

True, I might be somewhat experienced now. I wasn't though in the
beginning of this year. I had never touched a Linux OS until MS released
Vista. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Hmm... No previous unix experience?

Lang

 

[Stephan Rose]

Hmm... No previous unix experience?

I didn't even know how to spell "sudo" when I started out.

My OS History roughly looks like this:

DOS->Win95->Win98->Win2k->XP->Ubuntu.

I had never previously even tried it. Never downloaded an iso, never
touched a live cd, nothing. I couldn't have been a bigger linux newbie
than I was when I started using ubuntu.

Before Vista, the thought of touching Linux never crossed my mind. It
didn't have a reason to. I was perfectly happy with XP and a very strong
supporter of everything MS. Then Vista came along....and managed to turn
me around a complete 180 degrees.

Sure, the first month using Ubuntu was a little tough. Particularly for
someone like me whose needs go beyond web, e-mail and word documents. I
had quite a few more things to figure out than the average person most
likely would.

Now that this is over though, I couldn't be happier with that I have.

One thing I discovered is to take online tutorials with a big shovel full
of salt. For one example, nVidia drivers. You can find a dozen different
ways to install nVidia drivers. One more complicated than the other.

Why nobody ever thought to just simply follow nVidia's own instructions
however is beyond me. nVidia's instructions reduce the effort to 1 single
command line call which starts their setup, asks a few questions, and then
happily installs the driver.

In the end what I found is that pretty much most things out there can many
times actually be done in far simpler ways. Especially with Ubuntu and its
newer versions. I can easily tell you that I would have probably taken
less than half the time to get used to version 7.04 than it took me for
version 6.10. The new 7.10 version looks even more promising with upcoming
hot plug support for monitors and drivers (I don't think even Vista has
hot plug support for drivers does it?).

So in the end, I am now a very happy person. There are only three things I
now need to keep windows around for:

- Creation and testing of windows binaries of my software.
- 3D CAD/CAM work I do occasionally
- Occasional gaming...need to buy a Wii!!

Those 3 things add up to less than 25% of my PC usage. Matter of fact, my
office PC hasn't seen windows in a week.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Lang Murphy]

I didn't even know how to spell "sudo" when I started out.

My OS History roughly looks like this:

DOS->Win95->Win98->Win2k->XP->Ubuntu.

I had never previously even tried it. Never downloaded an iso, never
touched a live cd, nothing. I couldn't have been a bigger linux newbie
than I was when I started using ubuntu.

Before Vista, the thought of touching Linux never crossed my mind. It
didn't have a reason to. I was perfectly happy with XP and a very strong
supporter of everything MS. Then Vista came along....and managed to turn
me around a complete 180 degrees.

Sure, the first month using Ubuntu was a little tough. Particularly for
someone like me whose needs go beyond web, e-mail and word documents. I
had quite a few more things to figure out than the average person most
likely would.

Now that this is over though, I couldn't be happier with that I have.

One thing I discovered is to take online tutorials with a big shovel full
of salt. For one example, nVidia drivers. You can find a dozen different
ways to install nVidia drivers. One more complicated than the other.

Why nobody ever thought to just simply follow nVidia's own instructions
however is beyond me. nVidia's instructions reduce the effort to 1 single
command line call which starts their setup, asks a few questions, and then
happily installs the driver.

In the end what I found is that pretty much most things out there can many
times actually be done in far simpler ways. Especially with Ubuntu and its
newer versions. I can easily tell you that I would have probably taken
less than half the time to get used to version 7.04 than it took me for
version 6.10. The new 7.10 version looks even more promising with upcoming
hot plug support for monitors and drivers (I don't think even Vista has
hot plug support for drivers does it?).

So in the end, I am now a very happy person. There are only three things I
now need to keep windows around for:

- Creation and testing of windows binaries of my software.
- 3D CAD/CAM work I do occasionally
- Occasional gaming...need to buy a Wii!!

Those 3 things add up to less than 25% of my PC usage. Matter of fact, my
office PC hasn't seen windows in a week.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Well, I think that's pretty impressive. I also think you're the exception,
not the rule, when it comes to digging into the depths of any Linux distro.
Most folks aren't going to persevere like you did, either because they
aren't as intelligent or because they don't have the initiative. I probably
fall into both categories.

Thanks for the feedback; appreciated!

Lang

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well, I think that's pretty impressive. I also think you're the exception,
not the rule, when it comes to digging into the depths of any Linux distro.
Most folks aren't going to persevere like you did, either because they
aren't as intelligent or because they don't have the initiative. I probably
fall into both categories.

Thanks, if you ever go at it again...feel free to direct questions to me.
I'll happily answer them. Well...as long as you aren't trying to make a
broadcom wireless chipset work with ndiswrapper. At that point in time,
I'll just tell you to get a linux supported wireless card lol. =)

Matter of fact, that reminds me....need to buy intel wireless card for my
notebook. =)

Thanks for the feedback; appreciated!

Anytime =)


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Lang Murphy]

Thanks, if you ever go at it again...feel free to direct questions to me.
I'll happily answer them. Well...as long as you aren't trying to make a
broadcom wireless chipset work with ndiswrapper. At that point in time,
I'll just tell you to get a linux supported wireless card lol. =)

Matter of fact, that reminds me....need to buy intel wireless card for my
notebook. =)


Anytime =)


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Stephan,

OK, roger that (as they say in the Navy...) Thanks for the offer.

Lang

 

[Guest]

That is exactly why I am asking for the possibility to change the shell of
Vista. My question is completely valid but the likelyhood of a "yes" to my
question is extremely slim.

I think you fall under the category of "I do not know what a sheel is."
Please do some research on what a shell is and why it was created before
responding.

 

[Guest]

Well one suggestion I'd have for you is Kubuntu as it uses the KDE Desktop
which mimics the XP Desktop in general look and feel. Anyone that can move
a mouse and click on things can use it.

Define "Can work with Windows Servers"? What does it need to do? Accessing
shared directories on windows servers is no problem.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

I've been hearing about that OS lately and I think I need to take alook into
it.

My hope that the other OS can adhere to Active Directory user accounts and
policies . But that is what I want it to do. So I guess I can define
working with Windows Servers something along the lines of what you are
thinking. I was hoping for more than SAMBA, but i just wished other OSes
behaved just like XP but were not Microsoft based and I could save on
licenseing.

 

[Guest]

Thanks to both Lang and Stephan...

I was just like Stephan... my experience was DOS 5.0, DOS 6.22, (VMX),
Windows 3.1 (& 3.11), (UNIX for school as a user), Win95, WinNT 4.0, Windows
2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 (& R2). I've dabbled with Fedora as
well but I couldn't figure out how to do certain things and I didn't use it
so I deleted it.

Anyways, I am in this situation... I liked MS and it was my livelyhood. Now
I do not want to be bound by any 1 OS because it isn't the best model for any
company and it pressures the industry to interoperate better. It started
because I don't like Vista *and* I do not think it is a good fit for my
company. So I am looking for options. You two gave me a lead and I will
need to find time to test it. But in the long run, I need to keep my Windows
Server infrastructure because of certain critical apps.

I still haven't been offered any shells for Vista that make Vista work like
XP. So if you know of any please let me know. Additionally I have tried
Classic Start menu and it doesn't do what I want. My complain there is
Classic Start menu takes the OS all the way back to Windows 2000 and it
doesn't "fix" the search usability I don't like.

 

[Frank]

Thanks to both Lang and Stephan...

I was just like Stephan... my experience was DOS 5.0, DOS 6.22, (VMX),
Windows 3.1 (& 3.11), (UNIX for school as a user), Win95, WinNT 4.0, Windows
2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 (& R2). I've dabbled with Fedoraas
well but I couldn't figure out how to do certain things and I didn't use it
so I deleted it.

Anyways, I am in this situation... I liked MS and it was my livelyhood.Now
I do not want to be bound by any 1 OS because it isn't the best model for any
company and it pressures the industry to interoperate better. It started
because I don't like Vista *and* I do not think it is a good fit for my
company. So I am looking for options. You two gave me a lead and I will
need to find time to test it. But in the long run, I need to keep my Windows
Server infrastructure because of certain critical apps.

I still haven't been offered any shells for Vista that make Vista work like
XP. So if you know of any please let me know. Additionally I have tried
Classic Start menu and it doesn't do what I want. My complain there is
Classic Start menu takes the OS all the way back to Windows 2000 and it
doesn't "fix" the search usability I don't like.

:

Is that you capin' crunch?
Frank