Re: I don't hate Vista
I see what you mean now
I have been using/recommending MS products since DOS 3 and as we all grow
older and have learned a few things along the way, I thought things could
have been different and we should raise our expectation bar. Guess not
"Bob W" <ogwoolf@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:OuYIN7bqIHA.4716@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Hey!
I didn't say I "liked" Vista! I said I've made it work for me.
Let's just say I "made it work for me whether it wanted to or not", and let
it go at that. XP sucked when it first came out but it got better. That's
a pattern with Microsoft since the get-go. They did the same thing with 95,
98 2000 and NT. I REALLY don't like the fact that they publish a far from
mature software product every few years and basically use the public (and
out time and money) and developmental genny pigs. But that is the ego and
mentality that is Microsoft.
But it is what it is and there aren't an awful lot of games in town.
Bob, Still Old, Still Grey, And Still A Woolf
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message and a very large number
of electrons were asked their permission to be terribly inconvenienced. And
a party was thrown for them afterwards for being really cool about it.
Bob's Space - Home Page of the Olde Greywoolf
"xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OoOJ5mbqIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Hi,
Thanks for sharing and I'm glad that it works for you
I never challenged
anyone who likes Vista (or any other product for the matter) and admire
those who have the patience and willingness to go through all those
tweaking. It's just that most regular users are not in the groups of geeks,
techies, and so on.
My two cents though.
"Bob W" <ogwoolf@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eeBKKhbqIHA.2492@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Well, I have to say that if I had been given a choice back in November when
I got my new laptop whether to get it with XP or Vista, I'd have chosen XP,
hands down. But once you tweak Vista, turn off all the administrative BS
that a single user does not need (yes, the damn UAC!), clean up the start up
programs list, unload all the extra crap, Vista isn't so bad. It seems to
work OK and has some nice features that XP lacked (some of the Control Panel
features and tools, the Recovery Manager Console, Partition Wizard, etc.).
The IE7 is nice, even if it still tends to crash now and then and doesn't
want to load some pages (I use Firefox as my default and only go to IE7 when
I have to), the WinMail is OK and basically a clone of Outlook Express with
some extras, and the security seems to be better, if a bit annoying at
times. For me, I don't depend on Vista build-in security that much and use
a third party security suite (McAfee) and if you want a more feature filled
mail program, I highly recommend Windows Live Mail (freebie companion to the
Windows Live Messenger and SkyDrive MySpace look alike).
I have dumped the Aero thingy and gone to a classic desktop seem so I have
pretty much turned my Vista HP SP1 into a XP clone with extras. Works Ok
for me. Still, I have to admit that Vista, compared to XP, uses up a lot of
RAM and resources, HD space and it boots slower (even with a cleaned up
startup menu) and in general is slower than XP. But then my new laptop has
a Core 2 Duo at 2.2Mhz which helps compensate for the slower operation. The
1 GB RAM in my old XP laptop had to be 2 GB RAM for my new Vista system and
even then I have already gotten the chips to max it out to 4 GB ram.
]
And while there has been some compatibility problems with third part
programs that ran OK under XP but don't work well with Vista or have minor
bugs (Norton SS 2008, Word Perfect 3X, and some others), those problems are
slowly being resolved and most software publishers are making Vista
compatible programs available now.
So that's the story, for me on XP vs. Vista. Vista's plug and play hardware
is pretty good and the driver update is also a good thing over XP. As for
the slow boot up speed, it's not that slow and beside, with Vista I usually
don't shut down at all (running on wall power all the time) so when I want
to stop computing for the day, I just put her into SLEEP mode so it wakes up
pretty fast.
That help resolve your question? A lot of it is matter of preference and
choice and like XP, it will get better with updates. SP1 did a lot to fix
some problems. IE7 still needs a lot of work. Looking forward to the IE8.
In the mean time I'm happy with Firefox 2.04.
Bob, Still Old, Still Grey, And Still A Woolf
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message and a very large number
of electrons were asked their permission to be terribly inconvenienced. And
a party was thrown for them afterwards for being really cool about it.
Bob's Space - Home Page of the Olde Greywoolf
http://oldegreywoolf.spaces.live.com/
"xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ewPutXbqIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I agree with you. However, migrating to an improved version is part of the
progress, if the cost is justifiable even not totally.
Vista is a special case in which it has produced nothing but troubles for
many businesses and consumers including placing special orders for the other
OS and/or exercising the downgrade right.
I understand that this is not an official channel for feedbacks and I have
no interests in participating in their official feedback programs as now MS
is the largest software company not a start-up company. I do however share
some of my thoughts (which may not be correct) in hope that they realize
what are going on.
"C.B." <notreallyc.b.mullen@windowslive.com> wrote in message
news:ewY2fxVqIHA.4928@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>
> "xfile" <coucou@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:u3SjWxSqIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Me neither. I just feel disappointed.
>>
>>> For all users Vista presents an arbitrary change in interface and an
>>> arbitrary change in the way to perform familiar tasks, not better or
>>> worse but arbitrarily different.
>>
>> Many people claimed that this is subject to individual's preference, but
>> in this case, it's more than that.
>>
>> For enthusiasts, hobbyists, and people who make a living by
>> teaching/helping other users, this might be a good change, and perhaps, a
>> welcome opportunity to demonstrate their new skills and knowledge. For
>> those who don't care much about anything and everything, this change
>> doesn't affect them as any other things in the world.
>>
>> For ROI-oriented persons and decision makers, this is one of the largest
>> cost elements for adoption, and worst of all, it is almost impossible to
>> accurately estimate the learning cost due to it is on an ongoing basis.
>> This arbitrary change also helps those IT departments that have not had
>> enough user complaints (I wonder how many) to have more than they
>> deserved.
>>
>> An additional benefit is to evoke the user's sleeping consideration sets
>> and ask, if I have to spend so much efforts on learning the new OS, will
>> it be better for me to seek for an alternative solution?
>>
>> In my personal view, this is one of the worst design decisions made for
>> the product. If it helps to reduce the numbers of clicks, scrolls, eye
>> and hand movements, and the use of commands, it would be a totally
>> different story. But it doesn't and based on my own experience and what I
>> have read, it requires even more use of commands.
>>
>> The irony is that Linux is moving toward GUI, and at the same time,
>> Windows is moving toward using more commands.
>>
>> No, I don't hate Vista nor MS; I just don't believe that this is their
>> product.
>>
>>
>>
>> "Nogginsaked" <fac_187@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:43402C14-40A8-4B1B-8F85-1F9CD0B5C1F1@microsoft.com...
>>>I don't hate Vista but except for change for its own sake I cannot
>>>conceive why anyone would change from a stable XP desktop or network to
>>>Vista.
>>> For all users Vista presents an arbitrary change in interface and an
>>> arbitrary change in the way to perform familiar tasks, not better or
>>> worse but arbitrarily different. For all users the UAC is as useless as
>>> an Orange Terror Threat Alert and for all users hardware performance
>>> will be time-by-watching-paint-dry slower under Vista/VSP1.
>>> If you are running a large network with users of dubious skill then
>>> re-educating people who can barely use XP is a nightmare, not to mention
>>> the seemingly unsolvable networking oddities of Vista and ongoing
>>> deficiencies in peripheral drivers.
>>> Large companies, and I run a small one, can do the math: replacing
>>> perfectly functional boxes just so they can run a different OS to
>>> perform the exact same software tasks makes no economic sense, less so
>>> in a recession and doubly less so if you are moving to web based
>>> applications. Why replace boxes just to run a different OS when the
>>> hardware demands of your business software do not require the upgrade?
>>> I suggest that Microsoft push out a new version of XP that has the aero
>>> interface if desired (Windows Live on XP has see through tops), allows
>>> users to retain any interface features they like about Vista (if any)
>>> and call it Vista SP2.
>>
>>
>
>
> I personally don't see a need for anyone, businesses included, to
> migrate to Vista if there is no need to do so. If you're happy with your
> current OS, and migrating to Vista will offer you no advantages other than
> security, why do so?
>
> C.B.
>
>
> --
> It is the responsibility and duty of everyone to help the underprivileged
> and unfortunate among us. 