XP SP3 Details?

[student]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?


On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you
> control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write programs
> to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately
> blamed. Be objective.
> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>> ...
>>
>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>> programs.
>>
>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips
>> body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball
>> or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that
>> reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise
>> good system and are more harm than good most of the time.
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>

 

[ANONYMOUS]

Re: XP SP3 Details?



Tom Willett wrote:
>
> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
> news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
> | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008.
> | This date is preliminary."
> |
> | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>
> BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3. And, they
> always say it's preliminary ;-)


Perhaps that is what "preliminary" means

 

[Dave B.]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

From Webster's online;

Main Entry: 1pre·lim·i·nary
Pronunciation: pri-'li-m&-"ner-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -nar·ies
Etymology: French préliminaires, plural, from Medieval Latin praeliminaris,
adjective, preliminary, from Latin prae- pre- + limin-, limen threshold
: something that precedes or is introductory or preparatory: as a : a
preliminary scholastic examination b plural, British : FRONT MATTER c : a
preliminary heat or trial (as of a race) d : a minor match preceding the
main event (as of a boxing card)

--
----
Crosspost, do not multipost http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
How to ask a question http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
How to Post http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
news:46C20EB7.5BBB55E6@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
>
>
> Tom Willett wrote:
>>
>> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
>> news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
>> | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008.
>> | This date is preliminary."
>> |
>> | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>>
>> BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3. And, they
>> always say it's preliminary ;-)
>
>
> Perhaps that is what "preliminary" means

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.

Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.

I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
difficult.

I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
listening.

> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>> jour ...
>>
>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>> programs.
>>
>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>> good most of the time.
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

student added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?

Can't be true, MS write the best software in the world,
especially its apps. <grin here?> Software really isn't all that
different than my major field, cars, where we long buried our
mistakes and "bugs" by bringing out a new model - with its own
"bugs" of course, while leaving the hapless owners of previous
models to fend for themselves. This is the brutal world of fierce
competition, of which the world has never known more brutal
across all segments of the economy today.
>
> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>> jour ...
>>>
>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non
>>>> MS programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan
>>>> protection? programs.
>>>
>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it
>>> is certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the
>>> novices will wreck an otherwise good system and are more
>>> harm than good most of the time.
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

>
> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
> news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
>| "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H
>| CY2008. This date is preliminary."
>|
>| http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>
> BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3.
> And, they always say it's preliminary ;-)
>
Nobody pre-announces without caveats, not software, not hardware,
not anything. Too much possibility of bad PR if the date is missed
for any reason good, bad, or indifferent. I cannot fault MS for
being vague about SP3, especially since they would much rather sell
a Vista upgrade or a new PC with Vista installed than encourage
it's installed base to stay on XP any longer than necessary. But,
they will do an SP because it saves THEM manpower and money they'd
rather put towards the next better mousetrap.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Ken Blake, MVP added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

>> "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H
>> CY2008. This date is preliminary."
>
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>
> As I said, no announcement has been made. "Currently planned"
> and "preliminary" does not amount to an announcement. It is
> very common that such dates turn out not to be met.

Certainly cannot fault you or MS for this statement, which I highly
agree with. If I may be allowed yet another car analogy, we do NOT
announce future products unless and until there is a sales and
marketing reason, e.g., at a major car show such as NAIAS where
almost all the major new products for the fall season are shown for
the first time.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Bob I]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO, they aren't
responsible for the apps.

student wrote:

> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?
>
>
> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>
>>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you
>>control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write programs
>>to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately
>>blamed. Be objective.
>>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>
>>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>programs.
>>>
>>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips
>>>body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball
>>>or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that
>>>reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise
>>>good system and are more harm than good most of the time.
>>>
>>>--
>>>HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

> MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO,
> they aren't responsible for the apps.

Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure where
the O/S side and the application side eventually come together
and I would hope a company as large as MS would ensure that the
left hand knows what the right hand is doing. No, that's not
being sarcastic, just realistic as generally two very separate
divisions of any company often do not talk to each other nearly
enough.

> student wrote:
>
>> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?
>>
>>
>> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>>
>>>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>>>would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>>>companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>>>problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>>>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>
>>>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>>jour ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non
>>>>>MS programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan
>>>>>protection? programs.
>>>>
>>>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>>>the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>>>must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it
>>>>is certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the
>>>>novices will wreck an otherwise good system and are more
>>>>harm than good most of the time.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has
them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write
an error free program?
"student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message
news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?
>
>
> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you
>> control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write
>> programs
>> to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately
>> blamed. Be objective.
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>> programs.
>>>
>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips
>>> body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball
>>> or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that
>>> reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise
>>> good system and are more harm than good most of the time.
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you
should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating
system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in
development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some
bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a
few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be
objective not emotional.
"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>
> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>
> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
> difficult.
>
> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
> listening.
>
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>> jour ...
>>>
>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>> programs.
>>>
>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>>> good most of the time.
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The advancement of
PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look what they do today compared to two
years ago. Advancement???? Windows 95, 98, NT, XP, now Windows Vista.
"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>
> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>
> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
> difficult.
>
> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
> listening.
>
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>> jour ...
>>>
>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>> programs.
>>>
>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
>>> good most of the time.
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[Bob I]

Re: XP SP3 Details?



HEMI-Powered wrote:
> Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>
>>MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO,
>>they aren't responsible for the apps.
>
>
> Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure where
> the O/S side and the application side eventually come together
> and I would hope a company as large as MS would ensure that the
> left hand knows what the right hand is doing. No, that's not
> being sarcastic, just realistic as generally two very separate
> divisions of any company often do not talk to each other nearly
> enough.
>

But you have to remember the whacking they got from the DOJ and the
following requirement to "keep the boys from talking to eack other".

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett"
<tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote:

>
> "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message
> news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM...
> | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008.
> | This date is preliminary."
> |
> | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>
> BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3.


No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced no dates.
Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" indicate that these are
rough estimates, not promises.

If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or change it,
that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing an estimate is not.


> And, they
> always say it's preliminary ;-)


Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that when the
date is far enough in the future that they are unsure of it. When they
are closer to a release date and feel assured of making it, *then*
they will announce a date.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

>>>MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO,
>>>they aren't responsible for the apps.
>>
>> Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure
>> where the O/S side and the application side eventually come
>> together and I would hope a company as large as MS would
>> ensure that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.
>> No, that's not being sarcastic, just realistic as generally
>> two very separate divisions of any company often do not talk
>> to each other nearly enough.
>>
>
> But you have to remember the whacking they got from the DOJ
> and the following requirement to "keep the boys from talking
> to eack other".
>
Yep, sure do. And no matter what our personal opinions may be, they
beat the rap as well as fighting off Apple. I'm hardly saying the
court's decision was right and/or I agree, I'm just a commentin',
that's all. I understand and agree with your point, still, unless
MS is under some court order or restraining order or they fear a
renewed attack, unlikely under the current Administration, I would
think they would manage their company to maximize revenues and
profits WITHOUT violating or even appearing to violate anti-trust
laws by their internal actions. And again, I do not want to appear
to be disputing you here, but I would think that Steve Balmer would
WANT to also have the best possible quality software from ALL his
divisions, doesn't that make sense.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of
> significant size has them. However MS fixes theirs instead of
> blaming others. Did you ever write an error free program?

I sure as hell never came even close to bug free, and I go back to
mainframe FORTRAN, then Apple ][, then PC. I believe it can be
shown mathematically that it is impossible to guarantee bug-free
code, and empirically as software gets more and more complex and
must operate on more and more new HW and legacy HW and ditto for
SW, the chances of a bug-free release quickly fade, IMO of course.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> If indeed you were a programmer particularly a
> micro-programmer then you should have enough experience to
> recognize the complexity of an operating system plus all the
> micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in
> development you would know that regardless of the amount of
> testing some bugs will show up after release. How can you
> possibly be so critical of a few bugs? Compare today's PC's
> with those of just a few years ago. Be objective not
> emotional.

Sorry, can't follow the quotes. Are you talking to me or someone
else? If me, then see my other post just a minute ago. While I
never did O/S or systems software, I was always an applications
programmer, I DO understand the complexity of even a 2-bit O/S such
as Apple's old Dos 3.1 on the ][, so yes, by the time we got to Win
3.1, 95/98, XP, and now Vista, there is no longer any hope of a
free ride. And, I hope that sounds reasonably objective and
realistic, and NOT either emotional or at all MS-bashing.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The
> advancement of PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look what
> they do today compared to two years ago. Advancement????

This time I have the quotes straight. What I meant was that each
successive release of Windows in the exact sequence you mention has
been virtually an order of magnitude more complexity and lines of
code, no matter of what type. So, again, I am hardly bashing MS or
anyone, simply observing that /I/ feel that the situation is
"deteriotating" in that Vista cannot help but be a problematical
O/S until at least SP1, until at least all the HW manufacturers
fully come on board with drivers, and all the major SW developers
do the same. That's not being negative, it is being practical. As
I'm sure you're aware, my watchword is that I will NOT beta test
anyone's new anything with my Visa card. If others want to, that's
fine by me. OK, friends?

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[sabakunogaara]

Re: XP SP3 Details?


stick with xp

 

[student]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors told the
class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an "F" for the paper
for the errror in basic grammar. She was stopped only because a student
told her that it is word & one could not change it to be correct as
word will override & impose the bad grammatical error. The professor
said she learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking.

A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from putting
mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any changes to correct
ms crap.

For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products on both
compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a problem with drive
letters on both my home & work computers; they were running os/2 & nt.
Everything was working until the computers were booted up one day;
it wasn't either a virus or trojan. ms claimed that my partition
setup was wrong & sent a "white paper" showing how I should partition
the drive; I replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how
my drive partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms
announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie & do
their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups.

A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by "volunteers";
I don't think many of them were ever involved with ms on either genie
or compuserve to know any better.

Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got an email
from the people who do the ms backup software at that time; don't
remember the name as they have changed it but still in the ms
os releases. The email doc show how they encountered & found that the
problem was install process whereby the drive had to load into a dos
partition then reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32).

I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the ms
os crashes.......

Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in alt.usage.english
said that there was a website that had listings of grammar & spelling
problems with word; I never checked as have decided to stay with
wordperfect mainly for the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things,
hopefully.




On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
> Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has
> them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write
> an error free program?
> "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message
> news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu...
>> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app?
>>
>>
>> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote:
>>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you
>>> control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write
>>> programs
>>> to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately
>>> blamed. Be objective.
>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
>>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
>>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
>>>>> programs.
>>>>
>>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips
>>>> body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball
>>>> or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that
>>>> reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise
>>>> good system and are more harm than good most of the time.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>
>