|
Microsoft's "New Coke"
I know some people will not believe this, but this is the God's honest
truth. I just got an email from my son. I told him I would purchase him a new laptop when he starts his post graduate work next fall. I had been reviewing the laptops in the marketplace, and decided on Lenovo, MACPRO was just too damn expensive. Lenovo build a first class, dependable computer very popular business and professionals because they are so reliable. They build them without all of the freeware, demoware, spyware and general bloatware that you find on so many mfg'ers. This crap can turn a good computer into a piece of crap that runs at a snail's pace. Dell has stopped putting it into their very limited business line of computers, but still loads up consumer models with all of this stuff. I read that Dell makes about $60 for every computer they put this into, so they have refused to remove it from the bulk of their computers, but it might be why they are having financial problems. I told my son I could get him a Lenovo with WinXP fully loaded as long as I purchased it before June 30 and I wanted to know if he wanted a 14" or 15" screen. His reply to me was: "At my job I spent most of my time using a Mac, but I did have to use a PC for certain projects. It had Windows Vista on it, and i am certain history will call Vista Microsoft's version of "New Coke". I really appreciate your offer to buy me a new laptop, but could you just give me the money you were going to spend on the Lenovo, and let me buy a MAC". That is a strong statement for MAC's when a college student would rather spend his own money upgrading to a MAC than use a PC, and is an example of why Apple's market share continues to grow. My son is a pretty smart guy and I guess that is why a top tier school gave him a complete scholarship, and is paying him a decent salary to continue his education. He is too smart to buy into MS's "NEW COKE". |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
"Reggie is Here wrote: He is too smart to buy into MS's "NEW COKE". Accodring to Bill Gates, the next browser/op system is in the works and a beta will be released by Fall. They intend the release to go live in another year or thereabouts. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 5, 6:24*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Tim wrote:
On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! He's referring to an old modest version of Windoze OS, probably the one he uses on his 80286 desktop. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
JimH wrote:
"hk" wrote in message . .. Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. The initial post was nothing more than a troll, something the author enjoys doing here. Ignore the troll. ;-) Well, of course. And Reggie's "quotes" from his kid sound just a tad made up. But of course everything about Reggie here is illusion. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: He is too smart to buy into MS's "NEW COKE". Accodring to Bill Gates, the next browser/op system is in the works and a beta will be released by Fall. They intend the release to go live in another year or thereabouts. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Bill Gates knows a dog when he sees it. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 23:24:49 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Accodring to Bill Gates, the next browser/op system is in the works and a beta will be released by Fall. They intend the release to go live in another year or thereabouts. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Only if Windows 7 is better than Vista. Want to see what the next version of Windows will be like? Look he http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/ Seriously, MS has gotten itself into a box. Depending on an OS as your main source of income, is a dead paradigm. With the new multi-core processors, virtualalization will kill MSs' cash cow. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070211-8811.html http://www.osnews.com/story/18804/Th...irtualisation/ |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 5, 8:12*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... *:) moron what? Computers? Think Honeywell! |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Apr 5, 8:12 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) moron what? Computers? Think Honeywell! ============================ Honeywell..... Honeywell, all they know is thermostats. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:59:16 -0500, wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 23:24:49 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Accodring to Bill Gates, the next browser/op system is in the works and a beta will be released by Fall. They intend the release to go live in another year or thereabouts. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Only if Windows 7 is better than Vista. Want to see what the next version of Windows will be like? Look he http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/xen/ Here's all I need to know about Xen. "It is necessary to support a variety of different operating systems to accommodate the heterogeneity of popular applications." Just based on that one sentence - this operating system is clearly homophobic and will never survice in the PC world. Get it - PC world? |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 5, 9:32*pm, hk wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... *:) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. Do you think the programmers and engineers at Microsoft itself don't know what they are talking about when they acknowledge numerous problems and try to offer fixes for those problems? Are they doing it out of hatred? |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 5, 9:49*pm, hk wrote:
JimH wrote: "hk" wrote in message ... Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... *:) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. The initial post was nothing more than a troll, something the author enjoys doing here. Ignore the troll. *;-) Well, of course. And Reggie's "quotes" from his kid sound just a tad made up. But of course everything about Reggie here is illusion.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, you are right about the hatred in the group. You hate anybody that doesn't believe all of your lies and bull****. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
|
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: More like BOB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hyjEGkm-A And how would you know about BOB? HMMMM? |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
wrote:
On Apr 5, 9:32 pm, hk wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. Do you think the programmers and engineers at Microsoft itself don't know what they are talking about when they acknowledge numerous problems and try to offer fixes for those problems? Are they doing it out of hatred? It isn't the engineers causing the problem. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
BAR wrote:
wrote: On Apr 5, 9:32 pm, hk wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... :) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. Do you think the programmers and engineers at Microsoft itself don't know what they are talking about when they acknowledge numerous problems and try to offer fixes for those problems? Are they doing it out of hatred? It isn't the engineers causing the problem. Two of my clients adopted VISTA early on, and when I go for a visit, I sometimes stop by the IT departments to see what it new. I always ask if anyone is having any serious VISTA problems, and the answer is always the same: "Nothing we can't handle...you know, the usual idiot user stuff." If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install, if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have VISTA-related problems. VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower? Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn. Hey, even I had a VISTA-related problem. I couldn't get the early release versions of SP1 to install on my desktop. I bitched, apparently to some of the right people, I got a call back, I was asked to send in a couple of log files, and a few weeks later, I got an email with instructions to follow. I did and voila!...SP1 installed properly and the procedures are now in the MS Knowledge Base. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 6, 8:55*am, BAR wrote:
wrote: On Apr 5, 9:32 pm, hk wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Apr 5, 6:24 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:30:55 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" Vista will be the 21st Century version of ME. Vista will be the 21st Century version of ....YOU?? Cripes! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me Moron... *:) You have to wonder about the level of, well, hatred in this newsgroup for a computer operating system virtually none of the naysayers run. Do you think the programmers and engineers at Microsoft itself don't know what they are talking about when they acknowledge numerous problems and try to offer fixes for those problems? Are they doing it out of hatred? It isn't the engineers causing the problem.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I didn't say it was. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"HK" wrote in message . .. If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install, if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have VISTA-related problems. VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower? Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn. How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer ..... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message . .. If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install, if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have VISTA-related problems. VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower? Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn. How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. That's a valid point. When I wander through Best Buy and some of the other box stores, I see grossly underpowered machines, desktops and laptops, running VISTA when they should be running XP. My guess is that the CPU in your daughter's machine is adequate, but that it is short of RAM. From what I have experienced and seen, a minimum of two GB of RAM is necessary to run VISTA properly. If that is the case, it is easy enough to fix and it doesn't cost much. You might also check that daughter's machine to see what it is actually running at startup and in the background. My wife was complaining about the "slowness" of her laptop the other day (she runs XP Pro) and when I checked it out, I found at least 15 apps running in the background or "open" that she simply did not use. I shut them down and voila!...a new computer! Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I won't argue with that, either. Forcing VISTA onto computers that barely meet MS's published minimum standards is not a good idea. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch Well, the comparison you are making is not valid. Apples and oranges. * My MacBook Pro came with two GB of ram, and for less than $100, I pulled out those two sticks of memory, and replaced them with sticks holding four GB of ram. Memory is cheap. I run XP Pro and VISTA on my MacBook. Both perform properly, and nearly as fast as on my desktop machine for most normal applications. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Eisboch wrote:
How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch Eisboch, I have helped two friends setup their Windows Vista desktops, one a Dell, the other a HP, one had at 2gb and the other had 3 gb of RAM and a Dual Core Processor with at least 4mg of Cache. They had the exact same complaint. They had a replaced 4 and 5 year old computers, and could not see any additional speed when opening their software. There are people who enjoy playing with their computers and putzing around and installing every alpha and beta software that comes along. They love Vista, because it is a beta software that you actually get to buy. Someone in rec.boats who purchased a laptop had the same complaint, and was wondering how to tweak Vista to speed it up. It is a common complaint in the Vista NG. I will end up buying my son the MAC since it was important enough for him to be willing to pay the difference. I am just glad my youngest daughter loves the idea of the new Lenovo Laptop with XP, because it will run all of her existing software. Since Lenovo doesn't preload the computer will all the junk that slows down a new machine, she should have a blazing fast computer, at half the cost of the MACPRO. If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install disk at a reasonable price. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Eisboch wrote: How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch Eisboch, I have helped two friends setup their Windows Vista desktops Bull****. There hasn't been one post in this newsgroup that indicates you know anything about computers or operating systems. All you have ever done is cut and pasted negative news stories about VISTA. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install disk at a reasonable price. My daughter is happy with the new computer and Vista. It replaced a clunky, very old desktop that was still working, running Windows '98. *I* am the one that happened to notice that it runs somewhat sluggishly compared to the older, HP Pavilion that I use (running XP) or my wife's laptop .... also a HP Pavilion, but the model optimized for "Multimedia". It also runs XP. Like Harry suggested, my daughter's new computer may be shy some RAM and may have a bunch of applications running in the background that slows it down. But that was not my point. My point was that for the average computer user who has limited knowledge of how to optimize a computer, Vista may be somewhat disappointing, even in a new computer shipped with Vista as the OS. Many people treat a computer like a toaster. Plug it in and use it. Not all people have the knowledge of how to optimize it, add memory, etc., nor do they care. They expect it to work, as advertised. That's why I think Vista is having a poor introduction. Eisboch |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install disk at a reasonable price. My daughter is happy with the new computer and Vista. It replaced a clunky, very old desktop that was still working, running Windows '98. *I* am the one that happened to notice that it runs somewhat sluggishly compared to the older, HP Pavilion that I use (running XP) or my wife's laptop .... also a HP Pavilion, but the model optimized for "Multimedia". It also runs XP. Like Harry suggested, my daughter's new computer may be shy some RAM and may have a bunch of applications running in the background that slows it down. But that was not my point. My point was that for the average computer user who has limited knowledge of how to optimize a computer, Vista may be somewhat disappointing, even in a new computer shipped with Vista as the OS. Many people treat a computer like a toaster. Plug it in and use it. Not all people have the knowledge of how to optimize it, add memory, etc., nor do they care. They expect it to work, as advertised. That's why I think Vista is having a poor introduction. Eisboch I agree with your point. Further, Microsoft provides lousy documentation with VISTA, perhaps even worse than it provided with XP. That, sadly, seems to be the trend these days. Even my "overpriced" MacBook came with scanty documentation. Why computer manufacturers think their customers know precisely what to do from the get-go is beyond my comprehension. Because we live on the fringes of a metro area, though, we do have a couple of Apple stores in our area, and the "geeks" there seem fairly knowledgeable. I've long been an "admirer" of the Apple stores, and almost always stop by when I am dragged to the Mall, so I was able to pick up bits and pieces of knowledge about the new Apple OS and one or two applications. It was not with a little trepidation, though, that I actually went in to buy an Apple laptop to replace my Thinkpad. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 6, 11:32*am, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install, if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have VISTA-related problems. VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower? Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn. How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. *They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. *It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. * I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. *Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM.. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. That's a valid point. When I wander through Best Buy and some of the other box stores, I see grossly underpowered machines, desktops and laptops, running VISTA when they should be running XP. My guess is that the CPU in your daughter's machine is adequate, but that it is short of RAM. From what I have experienced and seen, a minimum of two GB of RAM is necessary to run VISTA properly. If that is the case, it is easy enough to fix and it doesn't cost much. That's because it's freakin' bloatware at it's finest. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 6, 11:47*am, HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: Eisboch wrote: How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. *They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly.. I was playing with it the other day. *It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. * I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. *Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) *Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. * So, I am one of those "know-nothings" *who claims Vista is slower than XP. * In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch Eisboch, I have helped two friends setup their Windows Vista desktops Bull****. There hasn't been one post in this newsgroup that indicates you know anything about computers or operating systems. All you have ever done is cut and pasted negative news stories about VISTA.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Harry, you lie here constantly. Pretty presumptive of you to call bull**** on someone you know nothing about. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install disk at a reasonable price. My daughter is happy with the new computer and Vista. It replaced a clunky, very old desktop that was still working, running Windows '98. *I* am the one that happened to notice that it runs somewhat sluggishly compared to the older, HP Pavilion that I use (running XP) or my wife's laptop .... also a HP Pavilion, but the model optimized for "Multimedia". It also runs XP. Like Harry suggested, my daughter's new computer may be shy some RAM and may have a bunch of applications running in the background that slows it down. But that was not my point. My point was that for the average computer user who has limited knowledge of how to optimize a computer, Vista may be somewhat disappointing, even in a new computer shipped with Vista as the OS. Many people treat a computer like a toaster. Plug it in and use it. Not all people have the knowledge of how to optimize it, add memory, etc., nor do they care. They expect it to work, as advertised. That's why I think Vista is having a poor introduction. Eisboch Actually a computer really should run like a toaster, you plug it in and it works. One may need to learn how to use specific software applications, but it should not take a geek to run the computer. I am sure she has a many applications running in the background that she does not need, it is common with HP, Dell and others. But you probably have more applications running in the background than she does, since yours is an older computer and these new background applications do have a tendency to grow every time you install a new program. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"HK" wrote in message . .. I agree with your point. Further, Microsoft provides lousy documentation with VISTA, perhaps even worse than it provided with XP. That, sadly, seems to be the trend these days. Even my "overpriced" MacBook came with scanty documentation. Why computer manufacturers think their customers know precisely what to do from the get-go is beyond my comprehension. My 80 year old mother uses her computer everyday. It's an inexpensive, Dell laptop (running XP) that is so slow in booting up that if she wants to show me something on it, I tell her to turn it on and then go out and mow her lawn while it boots up. It's amazing however. She stays in touch with all her friends via email, loves getting pictures sent to her of her great-grandkids and does most of her shopping "on-line", including Pea-Pod, a food delivery service operated by the Stop and Shop grocery store chain. Every once in a while though she gets it all screwed up and either my brother or me has to try to get it de-tangled. Once, she was complaining about not being able to send or receive email. Somehow she had managed to delete the user data, email address, etc. from Outlook Express. Of course, she didn't own up to this until I was trying to re-enter the data. Sitting with my fingers on the keyboard, going through the process, I asked her, "What's your e-mail address?" She answered in all seriousness, giving me her full name, street address, state and zip code. Eisboch |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install disk at a reasonable price. My daughter is happy with the new computer and Vista. It replaced a clunky, very old desktop that was still working, running Windows '98. *I* am the one that happened to notice that it runs somewhat sluggishly compared to the older, HP Pavilion that I use (running XP) or my wife's laptop .... also a HP Pavilion, but the model optimized for "Multimedia". It also runs XP. Like Harry suggested, my daughter's new computer may be shy some RAM and may have a bunch of applications running in the background that slows it down. But that was not my point. My point was that for the average computer user who has limited knowledge of how to optimize a computer, Vista may be somewhat disappointing, even in a new computer shipped with Vista as the OS. Many people treat a computer like a toaster. Plug it in and use it. Not all people have the knowledge of how to optimize it, add memory, etc., nor do they care. They expect it to work, as advertised. That's why I think Vista is having a poor introduction. Eisboch Actually a computer really should run like a toaster, you plug it in and it works. One may need to learn how to use specific software applications, but it should not take a geek to run the computer. I am sure she has a many applications running in the background that she does not need, it is common with HP, Dell and others. But you probably have more applications running in the background than she does, since yours is an older computer and these new background applications do have a tendency to grow every time you install a new program. Any computer, regardless of the OS it is running, initially needs tweaking so it can reach it's full speed potential. There's a bit of space between plugging in and operating a bread toaster and plugging in and operating a desktop or laptop computer, but I'm sure this is all lost on a smug know-it-all asshole like Reggie. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 6, 7:21*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: More like BOB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hyjEGkm-A And how would you know about BOB? HMMMM? commercials on TV, man... Actually if you want to know the truth, I found the instructions while dumpster diving in your trash can..... |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Apr 6, 8:16*am, wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: More like BOB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hyjEGkm-A Wrong BOB. MS came out with a... wait for it... dumbed down version of Windows they called BOB. Looked like it was designed by Mr. Rogers in collaboration with Fisher-Price. It was a major flop, but subsequent versions of Windows have interfaces that look more and more like BOB, with vivid, cartoonish, brightly colored rounded icons, etc. I thought I was in your bozo bin? |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message . .. If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install, if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have VISTA-related problems. VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower? Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn. How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy? My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly. I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap" opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4 year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM. Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has. Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4 year old computer I am using now. Eisboch Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants or needs to be a computer expert. I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the years. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 11:19:24 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based computers. Yep. And geeks go through a growth cycle. They reach a point where they reject other geeks foisting unnecessary geekiness upon them. At that stage they turn to voluntary simplicity. XP will suffice, or for some even Win98. I personally resent tiny cell phone buttons. What's that all about? --Vic |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
"Jim" wrote in message ... Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants or needs to be a computer expert. I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the years. When home PC's were first becoming popular (and pre-Windows), I was really interested in them. I built and modified a few home brews and messed around with learning Basic, Fortran, "C" and Visual Basic for early GUI applications. But, the technology advanced so quickly over the years and since computers/programming was not my primary means of making a living, I was soon left far behind in both knowledge, skill and frankly interest. Still, today it is one of the few mass produced consumer products that it's industry depends on the customer to troubleshoot and debug ... mostly related to software. No other product would get away with it. Eisboch |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:18:30 -0400, "Jim" wrote: Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants or needs to be a computer expert. Exactly my feelings. I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the years. Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business. Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly. --Vic Hmmm. I'm sort of the opposite. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:18:30 -0400, "Jim" wrote:
Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants or needs to be a computer expert. Exactly my feelings. I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the years. Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business. Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly. --Vic |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:55:43 -0400, HK wrote: Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business. Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly. --Vic Hmmm. I'm sort of the opposite. Another way to look at it: I used to like doing my own car repairs. Hands on, saved some money, and had a reliable ride. That was necessary with those older cars. Now I expect my cars to be almost maintenance free. I resent a bad injector, or too many "check engine" lights. I put Vista in that category - just from what I've heard. XP fits more into my current car philosophy - beat it death and it keeps on doing everything I ask of it. Not talking avoiding regular preventative maintenance, but I don't want to be babying an OS like I babied my old cars. Might be some flaws in that analogy, but there it is. The older I get, the less I like to putz around with things I consider simple tools. An OS is basically a complex mass of code, and I spent years dealing with such for pay, and I'm tired of it. That's why I retired. --Vic Whatever floats. I had far more serious problems with XP, by the way, than I have had so far with VISTA. |
Microsoft's "New Coke"
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 17:24:14 -0400, HK wrote: I had far more serious problems with XP, by the way, than I have had so far with VISTA. Hard to imagine problems with XP - I can't think of one I've had. I did start with SP2 though. And I always investigate peripheral compatibility before I buy. What issues did you encounter? --Vic I started with an early beta, but I flushed each old version before installing the newer beta. I had some software incompatibilities with programs that were supposed to work with XP. Seriously. And one hardware problem with a USB proprietary card reader. I never got these problems resolved. Fortunately I had my Win2k laptop around and everything worked on it. Hell, I even got my ancient scanner to work with VISTA with an old, old, old driver! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:20 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com