Wrong again Vista!

[Carl Farrington]

Following on from my last bit of moaning about Vista's misrepresentations of
what's /actually/ going on (see 'Spot the active network connection:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/mi...read/thread/10ac30a5efea0c9e/78669fa9e8e58f65 )
...

I have another one: Spot the battery power remaining:
http://www.css-networks.com/wrong.jpg

Removal the A/C adapter seems to bring it back in-sync.

 

[Bill Yanaire]

So you want us to follow your Bitching about Vista? You are too lazy to
post your gripes here, you want us to do the work?

It's the day after Thanksgiving and I'm not about to work that hard!

Just FYI

 

[Steve Thackery]

You've reported these bugs, then, have you?

SteveT

 

[Mick Murphy]

I don't click on clowns links!!!!

 

[Carl Farrington]

You've reported these bugs, then, have you?

SteveT

I thought that was what the release candidates were for?

 

[Carl Farrington]

So you want us to follow your Bitching about Vista? You are too lazy to
post your gripes here, you want us to do the work?

It's the day after Thanksgiving and I'm not about to work that hard!

Just FYI

Oh, apologies - we don't have thanksgiving over here, although I'm not sure
what you mean about you doing the work. I was just venting yet more
frustration about the Vista that nobody wanted.

 

[Richard Urban]

If even just one person wanted Vista (I did) that makes you wrong.

--

Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

"...that nobody wanted."
Are you speaking for everyone?
Or
Have you extensively researched ALL computers users and came to that
conclusion?

In either case, like most such statements all inclusive statements,
you are simply WRONG.

 

[Carl Farrington]

"...that nobody wanted."
Are you speaking for everyone?
Or
Have you extensively researched ALL computers users and came to that
conclusion?

In either case, like most such statements all inclusive statements, you
are simply WRONG.

I'm just finding it hard to see why somebody would want it, other than an
enthusiast eager for something new. Microsoft keep harping on about how many
copies are sold, but they fail to mention that probably 90% of those
35,000,000 or whatever sold have been forced on people who never had a
choice! These people wanted to buy a computer, and would still have bought
that computer before Vista came about. So I think what they mean is that
35,000,000 (or whatever) would-be-XP-users were given Vista instead, rather
than "35,000,000 (or whatever) copies of Vista sold".

I am not into Microsoft bashing, and I genuinely think XP is a great
operating system, except for a few simple annoyances with the shell which
could be improved. I like Windows Server and I love Exchange Server. I just
don't think Vista was actually required.

The problem is that I cannot think of many things that are easier in Vista,
but I can think of lots of things that have become weirdly more cumbersome.

 

[Carl Farrington]

If even just one person wanted Vista (I did) that makes you wrong.

Of course but it would have been a bit of a mouthful to say "the Vista that
nobody except Richard Urban wanted"!

 

[Cyberhash]

I'm just finding it hard to see why somebody would want it, other than an
enthusiast eager for something new. Microsoft keep harping on about how
many copies are sold, but they fail to mention that probably 90% of those
35,000,000 or whatever sold have been forced on people who never had a
choice! These people wanted to buy a computer, and would still have bought
that computer before Vista came about. So I think what they mean is that
35,000,000 (or whatever) would-be-XP-users were given Vista instead,
rather than "35,000,000 (or whatever) copies of Vista sold".

35mil wont be total "sales" over the counter, of course that will still
include oem versions packaged with a new pc.

I am not into Microsoft bashing, and I genuinely think XP is a great
operating system, except for a few simple annoyances with the shell which
could be improved. I like Windows Server and I love Exchange Server. I
just don't think Vista was actually required.

Id disagree , im running both xp/vista in dual boot. From my experience the
only thing that vista suffers from is poor hard disk transfer rates / file
copying.

Vista runs much better on a multi cored system than xp does. More stable and
runs silky smooth

Anyone that's used a pc for a long time knows that a new operating system is
more than likely going to need new hardware to run it on.

Did windows 95 really fly on your 386 ???

The problem is that I cannot think of many things that are easier in
Vista, but I can think of lots of things that have become weirdly more
cumbersome.

Yup some things are harder to do, but i think they laid it out so that its
more user friendly to people that's never touched a pc in their life.

 

[Carl Farrington]

35mil wont be total "sales" over the counter, of course that will still
include oem versions packaged with a new pc.


Id disagree , im running both xp/vista in dual boot. From my experience
the only thing that vista suffers from is poor hard disk transfer rates /
file copying.

It also suffers from disgraceful network file copying as well. I agree that
it's a mostly smooth experience though - there isn't really a performance
problem, more of a logic problem. It started with the removal of icons from
the start menu, and just got worse from there onwards..

Vista runs much better on a multi cored system than xp does. More stable
and runs silky smooth

Anyone that's used a pc for a long time knows that a new operating system
is more than likely going to need new hardware to run it on.

Did windows 95 really fly on your 386 ???


Yup some things are harder to do, but i think they laid it out so that its
more user friendly to people that's never touched a pc in their life.

I think that was the intention, yes. Everything has become a walk-through
wizard and at-a-glance indicators have been dropped. For techies or IT
admins, it's become a PITA.

 

[DanS]

Did windows 95 really fly on your 386 ???

Not at all, but Win95 was a *giant* improvement over 3.11, and truly much
more of a new OS compared to 3.11 than Vista compared to XP.

It's a lot easier to put up with annoyances when the product is truly
better in countless ways.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

It is clear Windows vista is not right for you.
And since you feel there is no need for Windows Vista and there
continue to be choices you simply need to purchase what meets your
needs.

As for being forced, another incorrect assumption on your part.
Windows XP continues to be available.
Toshiba, Dell and possibly other major OEMs continue to sell computers
with Windows XP.
Nearly countless local shops will sell computers with the operating
system of the users choice.
With choices available, no one is forced.

Windows XP will probably be supported for several more years so those
with Windows XP performing as required, there is no need to change.

For the most part, the same was true for previous operating systems
and will probably be true in the future.

 

[Carl Farrington]

It is clear Windows vista is not right for you.
And since you feel there is no need for Windows Vista and there continue
to be choices you simply need to purchase what meets your needs.

It isn't right for me. The plain and simple only reason I am running it on
my laptop, is because my customers have been unwillingly landed with it on
computers that they have purchased, and as a result I need to work with it.

As for being forced, another incorrect assumption on your part.
Windows XP continues to be available.
Toshiba, Dell and possibly other major OEMs continue to sell computers
with Windows XP.
Nearly countless local shops will sell computers with the operating system
of the users choice.
With choices available, no one is forced.

That is so unapreciative of the situation as to be basically wrong. Go to PC
World and tell me how many of their machines have XP on them. Go to Dell and
look at the default O/S choice on the computers. If you buy through Dell's
business side you can choose XP, but it is not the default choice and the
choice isn't there at all for home users.
Have a look on insight.com and see how your choice of laptops becomes
severely limited once you narrow your selection to XP as an operating
system.

The simple fact is, people are buying computers, unaware of the operating
system, and then finding they're having to either (a) go buy OEM XP Pro/Home
and install that or pay someone to install it, or (b) put up with Vista.

Customers of mine were buying the Dell Dimension C521 machines for maybe 18
months. One of my customers decided he wanted a few more and bought three or
four more, just after Vista was released. These machines came with 512mb RAM
and Vista Business. He didn't know any the wiser, but he sure wishes he'd
have got XP now.

 

[Richard Urban]

People DO NOT have to purchase a computer with Vista on it - no matter what
you continue to state!

There are choices to be made. Unless a person buys a computer blind, without
ever having turned it on in the store (his/her own fault), or has received
it as a present (a lot of this is about to occur) there was a customer
choice to be made. The customer can fault no one for making that wrong
choice. Not he/she has to effect a remedy so that they remain happy and
contented.

I wonder if you will also grouse about the fact that the newest video boards
will not physically fit into a 3-5 years old computer - after you decided to
stay with your old computer because it has Windows XP on it.

Sorry, but not everyone is happy about everything. But you learn to cope
with things.

Personally I am pissed that the new 17 inch wheels and tires will not fit on
my 66 Ford Mustang. Damn the manufacturers for not having backward
compatibility! Gee, am I being unreasonable here???

--

Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

"my customers have been unwillingly landed"
It seems you have done your customers a disservice.
You should be helping them locate options that meet their needs.
They could return the computers and purchase another with Windows XP.
If they purchased retail vista, they can return it, easy within 45
days in North America, other regions may be different.

"The simple fact is, people are buying computers, unaware..."
Why are they unaware?
Are they new computer users in which case it does not usually matter?
Or have they purchased without even asking the most basic questions
customers ask when purchasing any type of products?

"to be basically wrong."
True ONLY if you stop looking after seeing the defaults.
But shopping for products, any products, should not stop there if the
listed features do not match the customers needs.

"isn't there at all for home users"
Go to Dell and search for Windows XP.
Very quickly and easily you locate computers with windows XP.
The options are there and easy to find for all users.
If your model does not appear to be available, call, similar as you
would for any product when you want it a certain way.
Why stop looking after seeing the defaults?
Is that how you shop for other items in the price range you spend on
computers?

"...then finding they're having to either..."
When you limit the options to two ignoring the other options, no
surprise you see choice.
However the choices are still there and east to locate.

"with 512mb RAM"
and that is still seen with low end computers, similarly as when
windows XP was released 6 years ago.
If your customer had researched a little, it would have been
discovered that 512 MB is insufficient for most with windows Vista.
If these are your customers why are they purchasing inadequate
systems?
Are you not helping your customers?
Or are they not asking until after the purchase?
At the release of windows XP, some bought computers with inadequate
RAM.
Many wished they had stayed with the previous operating system when
the better fix is to purchase hardware that meets the production
needs, and not ignoring cost by getting the cheapest.

If a consumer wants a product a certain way, they need to look for it.
Just like any type of product, the more particular you are in what you
get, the more you need to look.
Many are first time computer buyers and the version of Windows is
largely irrelevant since no matter what they need to learn.

For the more experienced, they need to research just like any other
product purchase.
The choices are there and they are easy to find.

I would have searched for the other options easily available to get
what I want.
What many already do with most types of products when deciding on what
to purchase.

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

 

[the wharf rat]

Anyone that's used a pc for a long time knows that a new operating system is
more than likely going to need new hardware to run it on.

I don't agree with that. That seems to only be true of certain
of the MS consumer oriented systems and not a general rule.

Did windows 95 really fly on your 386 ???

It flys on my 486's. Of ocurse they have the modern advantages
of 2GB drives and 24 MB of ram

 

[the wharf rat]

Personally I am pissed that the new 17 inch wheels and tires will not fit on
my 66 Ford Mustang. Damn the manufacturers for not having backward
compatibility! Gee, am I being unreasonable here???

In the case of Vista it's more like you bought a new Mustang so you
could run 17" wheels but you can't because due to Microsoft's Lug Nut
Rights Management no one's been able to release studs with the right thread
level encryption.

 

[the wharf rat]

Wharf Rat, you're obviously relaying second-hand information that you

Ummm, no.

I have a library of well over 67,000 songs and nearly 600 movies that I
encoded for use with Media Center and my XBox Extender, and DRM has not
once been a factor.

So you're whining about the basis of my statements and backing
your own arguments with anecdotal evidence?