"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

I am very glad your son's computer is working well, he deserves it.

I am sure yours and Harry's success with Vista is representative of
everyone who has used Vista.

I am sure yours and Harry's success with Vista is due to your superior
computer skills.

I am also sure the only reason she/I or anyone has ever had a problem
installing any hardware on Vista is human error.

I am sure you know much more about computers than those who make their
living operating networks and reviewing computers and OS.

Did I miss anything?

Did you read any of the directions that might relate to the proper set
up of a printer?
I followed the directions that came with the printer, but the printer
install CD really made the entire install process a step by step
process, and it asked you for your version of Windows (included Vista as
an option) . When the printer started to have problems, I followed the
trouble shooting process using Vista help, it did not have any solution
available in the troubleshooting guide that was appropriate to our
problem. So, I updated Vista (it had already installed all updates)
double checked the printer driver (it had the correct driver) then
reinstalled the printer program and reinstalled Office 2003.

At that point, it was still printing correctly only half the time, so I
printed out her resume by reversing the order of the print. She had her
resume printed, which was her immediate concern. I also tried to print
out a web page, it would not print the last page of the web site. Her
printer was working half the time, and told her she really should take
advantage of the service contract she had already paid for. If they
were not able to correct the problem, she will let me know.

Did you check for a more recent printer driver?

That is what I meant when I said "doubled checked the printer driver". I
specially checked for the most recent printer driver, both on Windows
update and by visiting the mfg'ers site.


Good.

I was listening to Leo LaPorte the other evening and he commented on copious
problems people are having with Vista and networking. Some work fine and
others are pulling their hair out.

I've installed Vista on this machine as a second OS just to give it a
cursory look see. From what I have seen so far I haven't been convinced to
switch from XP. I haven't tried to network my home PCs yet with Vista and
XP together. For fun, or frustration, maybe I'll give it a try.

D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
I am very glad your son's computer is working well, he deserves it.

I am sure yours and Harry's success with Vista is representative of
everyone who has used Vista.

I am sure yours and Harry's success with Vista is due to your superior
computer skills.

I am also sure the only reason she/I or anyone has ever had a problem
installing any hardware on Vista is human error.

I am sure you know much more about computers than those who make their
living operating networks and reviewing computers and OS.

Did I miss anything?

Did you read any of the directions that might relate to the proper set
up of a printer?
I followed the directions that came with the printer, but the printer
install CD really made the entire install process a step by step
process, and it asked you for your version of Windows (included Vista as
an option) . When the printer started to have problems, I followed the
trouble shooting process using Vista help, it did not have any solution
available in the troubleshooting guide that was appropriate to our
problem. So, I updated Vista (it had already installed all updates)
double checked the printer driver (it had the correct driver) then
reinstalled the printer program and reinstalled Office 2003.

At that point, it was still printing correctly only half the time, so I
printed out her resume by reversing the order of the print. She had her
resume printed, which was her immediate concern. I also tried to print
out a web page, it would not print the last page of the web site. Her
printer was working half the time, and told her she really should take
advantage of the service contract she had already paid for. If they
were not able to correct the problem, she will let me know.
Did you check for a more recent printer driver?
That is what I meant when I said "doubled checked the printer driver". I
specially checked for the most recent printer driver, both on Windows
update and by visiting the mfg'ers site.


Good.

I was listening to Leo LaPorte the other evening and he commented on copious
problems people are having with Vista and networking. Some work fine and
others are pulling their hair out.

I've installed Vista on this machine as a second OS just to give it a
cursory look see. From what I have seen so far I haven't been convinced to
switch from XP. I haven't tried to network my home PCs yet with Vista and
XP together. For fun, or frustration, maybe I'll give it a try.



I really could not figure out what the advantage of Vista was, even if
it was running correctly and didn't use more memory than WinXP. It
looks to me that the security upgrades in Vista are available via XP
updates.

I am sure the different look of the Start Menu, and what not, will
become 2nd nature after you use it for awhile, I just can not understand
why anyone would want to.

Microsoft understands this is a common perception with Vista and is
now allowing resellers to provide users who purchased computers
with Vista to provide their customers a free version of WinXP. Even if
your computer is running perfectly, I can't figure out why one would
want to tie up resources with their OS instead of using them on your
programs.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


I really could not figure out what the advantage of Vista was, even if
it was running correctly and didn't use more memory than WinXP. It
looks to me that the security upgrades in Vista are available via XP
updates.



The real answer is, you simply don't know and apparently are satisifed
with not knowing.

One answer: VISTA addresses more memory than XP. Even the 32-bit version
of VISTA address more memory than XP.

There are other reasons.

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:


I really could not figure out what the advantage of Vista was, even if
it was running correctly and didn't use more memory than WinXP. It
looks to me that the security upgrades in Vista are available via XP
updates.



The real answer is, you simply don't know and apparently are satisifed
with not knowing.

One answer: VISTA addresses more memory than XP. Even the 32-bit version
of VISTA address more memory than XP.

There are other reasons.

That seems to be one of the problems people are having with Vista and
resulting in Vista crashing more often than their Win XP system.
Especially those who run memory demanding software, such as games.
"Appropriately, the difference in address space usage was the reason
that Supreme Commander would not crash under XP like it would under Vista"

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=3044

Since the two oldest don't live at home, we don't use my computer for
games. I use Office 2003, and don't plan on upgrading anytime soon. I
don't have any problems with my current system running all of my
programs, and never have a problem with the system crashing, but I have
an old habit of reboot every morning. I am not sure if I really need to
do this, but I just do.

I am glad Vista works great for you and JimH, but it is easy to
understand why large users of Windows, serviced by IT professionals,
have not converted over. It also explains why Microsoft, for the first
time ever, is making it very easy for people to purchase an outdated
version of Windows, or even get a free downgrade to an older version of
windows after purchasing Vista.

As you said, I am not a "Vista Geek", most of us are not "Vista Geeks",
and most of us don't want to be a "Vista Geek", all we want is to use
our computers without any problems.

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:23:15 -0500, HK wrote:


One answer: VISTA addresses more memory than XP. Even the 32-bit version
of VISTA address more memory than XP.

You do know, XP had a 64-bit edition.

wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:23:15 -0500, HK wrote:


One answer: VISTA addresses more memory than XP. Even the 32-bit version
of VISTA address more memory than XP.

You do know, XP had a 64-bit edition.


Sure do. Seen much of it?

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 16:39:23 -0500, HK wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:23:15 -0500, HK wrote:


One answer: VISTA addresses more memory than XP. Even the 32-bit
version of VISTA address more memory than XP.

You do know, XP had a 64-bit edition.


Sure do. Seen much of it?

No, I break out in hives when I'm around anything Microsoft. ;-)