Do you think Windows Vista is slow, crash-prone, or unreliable? Join the crowd.

Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too, just so they can be even more
warned about how bad vista is, and to avoid it.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=437

read the rest of this article on the above link

Do you think Windows Vista is slow, crash-prone, or unreliable? Join the
crowd.

Over the past year, reviews of Windows Vista by mainstream media outlets,
the technical press, bloggers, and ordinary users have been, for the most
part, scathing. And many of those bad reviews were absolutely accurate. My
co-authors and I just completed an extensive post-Service Pack 1 revision of
our book Windows Vista Inside Out. Over the past year, we installed,
upgraded, and used Windows Vista on a broad cross-section of hardware
designs from nearly a dozen manufacturers. During that time, we experienced
some of those same performance, reliability, and compatibility issues
ourselves. What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and performance
could suffer. Badly.

Over the past year or so, we have also observed steady and occasionally
dramatic improvements in the Windows ecosystem. Most of the large issues in
Windows Vista were effectively resolved by a series of updates delivered via
Windows Update, including more than 500 fixes that were rolled up into
Service Pack 1. Third-party hardware makers, many of whom were slow to get
working Vista drivers out the door, have since released updates that can
make a huge difference in the Vista experience.

Bob
Thu May 08 06:39:31 PDT 2008

Nutjob.

Clear Windows wrote:

> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,

Clear
Thu May 08 06:49:03 PDT 2008

Hello, Bob.

You can file a complaint against all the world for using LOGIC to conclude
that vista is a pile of steaming crap.

Here is what you will say>

STOP IT!!!!!! (heavy panting, foam coming out of your mouth, vein throbbing
on forehead)

Stop saying vista is bad, stop giving us so complex facts and LOGIC!

I DON'T CARE I TELL YOU!!!! I love vista.... its shiny!!!......
.......oh.............how nice... vista nice.... (your gaze is lost while
you look at the shiny vista icons)





"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:umJPzDRsIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Nutjob.
>
> Clear Windows wrote:
>
>> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,
>

Bob
Thu May 08 06:58:15 PDT 2008

My mistake, nutjob cubed!

Clear Windows wrote:

>
>
> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:umJPzDRsIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>> Nutjob.
>>
>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>
>>> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,
>>
>>

Clear
Thu May 08 07:06:14 PDT 2008

You are an idiot in the power of googol, also known as googolplex.

a googol is a number starting with a one 1 followed by 100 zeros,
a googolplex is 10 in the power of one googol.

still you are not even close to the stupidity of Frank who is a stupid in
the power of a googolplex.



"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e88IRORsIHA.4360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> My mistake, nutjob cubed!
>
> Clear Windows wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:umJPzDRsIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> Nutjob.
>>>
>>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>>
>>>> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,
>>>
>>>
>

Bob
Thu May 08 07:26:30 PDT 2008

Snicker, I win!

Clear Windows wrote:

>
> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e88IRORsIHA.4360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>> My mistake, nutjob cubed!
>>
>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:umJPzDRsIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>> Nutjob.
>>>>
>>>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>

Alias
Thu May 08 07:32:23 PDT 2008

Bob I wrote:
> Snicker, I win!

And what do you win, Queen for a Day?

Alias
>
> Clear Windows wrote:
>
>>
>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:e88IRORsIHA.4360@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> My mistake, nutjob cubed!
>>>
>>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:umJPzDRsIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Nutjob.
>>>>>
>>>>> Clear Windows wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

Frank
Thu May 08 07:32:38 PDT 2008

Clear Windows wrote:

> Im posting this to the XP newsgroup too, just so they can be even more
> warned about how bad vista is, and to avoid it.

You need to get a real life, loser!
Nobody gives a shit about your GD Vista hating blog.
Shove it up your stupid ass, loser!
Frank

oh, and have a nice day you stupid POS idiot moron loser!...LOL!

Frank
Thu May 08 07:34:16 PDT 2008

Clear Windows, the fukkin moron idiot loser wrote:

---------------------------------
Well, well, well....so Vista owns your stupid ignorant incompetent
ass...LOL!
You're a real loser!
Frank

Carl
Thu May 08 07:51:07 PDT 2008

But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on decent
hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
would you?

Adam
Thu May 08 08:17:53 PDT 2008

On Thu, 8 May 2008 17:06:14 +0300, "Clear Windows"
<carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote:

>You are an idiot in the power of googol, also known as googolplex.
>
>a googol is a number starting with a one 1 followed by 100 zeros,
>a googolplex is 10 in the power of one googol.
>
>still you are not even close to the stupidity of Frank who is a stupid in
>the power of a googolplex.

Frank's stupidity is boundless.

Just how stupid is Frank? No number big enough exists. However to give
you an idea of how retarded and stupid this troll is consider some
smaller numbers.

A quadrillion would be equal to the number of grains of sand on a
typical beach.

A Quattuordecillion would be equal to all the atoms in every drop of
water on the earth.

A Septillion (just 24 zeros) is the weight of the Earth in pounds.

A Sexdecillion equals the cubic volume in miles of our Milky Way
Galaxy.

Are we close to Frank's stupidity yet?

Hell no! Like Clear Windows suggests a googolplex isn't big enough to
come close.

Frank without a doubt is the dumbest poster you'll ever come across in
all of Usenet and little Frankie is damn proud of this dubious honor.

Tom
Thu May 08 08:31:04 PDT 2008


"Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...

> ourselves. What we found was simple: With a clean install on
> well-supported hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an
> incompatible application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and
> performance could suffer. Badly.

Please re-read this part of the article you posted and think about what it
says.

Incompatible application ... flaky video, storage, or network driver ...

Think about what it says. Are these Vista?

Think about what it says.

VanguardLH
Thu May 08 08:55:12 PDT 2008

"Clear Windows" wrote in <news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>:

> ... What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
> hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
> application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and performance
> could suffer. Badly. ...

Tis a problem with a general-purpose computer and a user-modifiable OS
that any software, whether driver or application, can fuck it up. The
biggest security risk to an OS is the user.

HeyBub
Thu May 08 08:56:56 PDT 2008

Tom Dacon wrote:
> "Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
> news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>
>> ourselves. What we found was simple: With a clean install on
>> well-supported hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an
>> incompatible application or a flaky video, storage, or network
>> driver, and performance could suffer. Badly.
>
> Please re-read this part of the article you posted and think about
> what it says.
>
> Incompatible application ... flaky video, storage, or network driver
> ...
> Think about what it says. Are these Vista?
>
> Think about what it says.

But the tube-type device always worked before. Sure, they have to change
crystals every now and again, but it won't work AT ALL with Vista!

Frank
Thu May 08 09:08:50 PDT 2008

VanguardLH wrote:
> "Clear Windows" wrote in <news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>:
>
>
>>... What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
>>hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
>>application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and performance
>>could suffer. Badly. ...
>
>
> Tis a problem with a general-purpose computer and a user-modifiable OS
> that any software, whether driver or application, can fuck it up. The
> biggest security risk to an OS is the user.

Yeah and capin' crunch is an excellent example of that!
Frank

Adam
Thu May 08 09:27:24 PDT 2008

On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:55:12 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>"Clear Windows" wrote in <news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>:
>
>> ... What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
>> hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
>> application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and performance
>> could suffer. Badly. ...
>
>Tis a problem with a general-purpose computer and a user-modifiable OS
>that any software, whether driver or application, can fuck it up. The
>biggest security risk to an OS is the user.

Vista is "fucked up" out of the box BEFORE you add a damn thing.

Don't think so? Then explain UAC oddness, Windows Explorer flakiness
and random slow file copying for starters. ALL can happen regardless
of your hardware, or third party software. So lets put the lion's
share of the blame where it belongs; squarely on Microsoft's doorstep.

Need more proof? If Vista wasn't flawed then Microsoft wouldn't have
rushed out SP1 and oh by the way it doesn't resolve all that's wrong
with Vista. No surprise there either.

This space reserved for the numbnuts squad that will counter by
dragging out the threadbare and pathetic 'all software has bugs'
excuse.

ROTFLMAO!

measekite
Thu May 08 09:30:14 PDT 2008



Frank wrote:
> Clear Windows, the fukkin moron idiot loser wrote:
>
> ---------------------------------
> Well, well, well....so Vista owns your stupid ignorant incompetent
> ass...LOL!
> You're a real loser!
> Frank
But what did Clear Windows write. You seem to delete what he says.

Frank
Thu May 08 09:38:12 PDT 2008

measekite wrote:

>
> But what did Clear Windows write. You seem to delete what he says.

------------------------------------------------------------

Are you really as dumb and as stupid as you appear to be?
Frank

Bill
Thu May 08 09:42:05 PDT 2008


"Frank" <fb@signm.crt> wrote in message
news:48232c61$0$7697$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> measekite wrote:
>
>>
>> But what did Clear Windows write. You seem to delete what he says.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Are you really as dumb and as stupid as you appear to be?
> Frank

See what happens when someone becomes an "Alias" follower and has to much
SHEEP in his diet?

Liam
Thu May 08 09:43:25 PDT 2008


"Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
news:48230919@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> You are an idiot in the power of googol, also known as googolplex.

There's always someone ready to make up statistics to support a viewpoint...
:-)

Liam
Thu May 08 09:56:44 PDT 2008

Yeah, Vista runs fine as long as you don't do anything with it. At a pinch
you might get away with using Microsoft Office carefully.

I have experienced hundreds of false "out of memory" errors, or errors of
operation that look exactly like my machine has run out of memory. This is
at exactly the same time that the Windows Vista system reports (correctly)
that there is loads of memory free. Today I discovered that Microsoft
finally found a bug that caused this behaviour six months ago, created a
fix, and DID NOT RELEASE IT AS A CRITICAL UPDATE. So losing all
functionality is considered "not critical" by Microsoft - what kind of
mushroom-fueled cloud are they living on?

Of course this is all fine as they are putting the patch in SP1. Oh, except
they still haven't released that to us little people (sometimes called
customers), after a year or more of putting up with the bug. So Microsoft's
idea of correct practice is to make customers put up with known bugs unless
they find the fix on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck
in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The
Leopard". [Thanks to Douglas Adams for the last quote, which seems fitting]

"Carl" <me@theworld.universe> wrote in message
news:DE2B7C71-1717-4FF6-B78E-46A3794DC7F2@microsoft.com...
> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
> decent hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an
> old 486 would you?

Frank
Thu May 08 10:03:45 PDT 2008

Bill Yanaire wrote:

> "Frank" <fb@signm.crt> wrote in message
> news:48232c61$0$7697$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>
>>measekite wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But what did Clear Windows write. You seem to delete what he says.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Are you really as dumb and as stupid as you appear to be?
>>Frank
>
>
> See what happens when someone becomes an "Alias" follower and has to much
> SHEEP in his diet?
>
>
>
hehehe...yeah, he and alias and mr drunken pig make quite trio of
losers...LOL!
Frank

Frank
Thu May 08 10:04:28 PDT 2008

Liam Roche wrote:

>
> "Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
> news:48230919@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>
>> You are an idiot in the power of googol, also known as googolplex.
>
>
> There's always someone ready to make up statistics to support a
> viewpoint... :-)

He only wished he could do that to his help desk paycheck...LOL!
Frank

Tom
Thu May 08 11:57:15 PDT 2008

LOL

"HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23JofhQSsIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Tom Dacon wrote:
>> "Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>
>>> ourselves. What we found was simple: With a clean install on
>>> well-supported hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an
>>> incompatible application or a flaky video, storage, or network
>>> driver, and performance could suffer. Badly.
>>
>> Please re-read this part of the article you posted and think about
>> what it says.
>>
>> Incompatible application ... flaky video, storage, or network driver
>> ...
>> Think about what it says. Are these Vista?
>>
>> Think about what it says.
>
> But the tube-type device always worked before. Sure, they have to change
> crystals every now and again, but it won't work AT ALL with Vista!
>

Milt
Thu May 08 14:31:48 PDT 2008

Clear Windows wrote:
> What we found was
> simple: With a clean install on well-supported hardware, everything
> worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible application or a flaky
> video, storage, or network driver, and performance could suffer. Badly.

That sounds like that could describe any OS ever written. Doesn't sound
like a Vista problem.

measekite
Thu May 08 14:32:21 PDT 2008



Adam Albright wrote:
> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:55:12 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>
>> "Clear Windows" wrote in <news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>:
>>
>>
>>> ... What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
>>> hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
>>> application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and performance
>>> could suffer. Badly. ...
>>>
>> Tis a problem with a general-purpose computer and a user-modifiable OS
>> that any software, whether driver or application, can fuck it up. The
>> biggest security risk to an OS is the user.
>>
>
> Vista is "fucked up" out of the box BEFORE you add a damn thing.
>
> Don't think so? Then explain UAC oddness, Windows Explorer flakiness
> and random slow file copying for starters. ALL can happen regardless
> of your hardware, or third party software. So lets put the lion's
> share of the blame where it belongs; squarely on Microsoft's doorstep.
>
The reason they are pushing for the next version of Windows so hard is
that the majority of corporations are not purchasing Vista.
> Need more proof? If Vista wasn't flawed then Microsoft wouldn't have
> rushed out SP1 and oh by the way it doesn't resolve all that's wrong
> with Vista. No surprise there either.
>
> This space reserved for the numbnuts squad that will counter by
> dragging out the threadbare and pathetic 'all software has bugs'
> excuse.
>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
>

measekite
Thu May 08 14:38:02 PDT 2008



Liam Roche wrote:
> Yeah, Vista runs fine as long as you don't do anything with it. At a
> pinch you might get away with using Microsoft Office carefully.
>
> I have experienced hundreds of false "out of memory" errors, or errors
> of operation that look exactly like my machine has run out of memory.
> This is at exactly the same time that the Windows Vista system reports
> (correctly) that there is loads of memory free. Today I discovered
> that Microsoft finally found a bug that caused this behaviour six
> months ago, created a fix, and DID NOT RELEASE IT AS A CRITICAL
> UPDATE. So losing all functionality is considered "not critical" by
> Microsoft - what kind of mushroom-fueled cloud are they living on?
>
> Of course this is all fine as they are putting the patch in SP1. Oh,
> except they still haven't released that to us little people (sometimes
> called customers), after a year or more of putting up with the bug.
> So Microsoft's idea of correct practice is to make customers put up
> with known bugs unless they find the fix on display in the bottom of a
> locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the
> door saying "Beware of The Leopard". [Thanks to Douglas Adams for the
> last quote, which seems fitting]
>
> "Carl" <me@theworld.universe> wrote in message
> news:DE2B7C71-1717-4FF6-B78E-46A3794DC7F2@microsoft.com...
This is why I choose to put up with lesser featured but more capable
better running DRM free software running under Linux that I do not have
to pay for. It seems that the Vista price is more than just the cash
outlay you pay at the store.
>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>> decent hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on
>> an old 486 would you?
>

Frank
Thu May 08 15:02:07 PDT 2008

meashershithead, the idiot moron austrian fascist pig wrote:

>
>
> Liam Roche wrote:
>
>> Yeah, Vista runs fine as long as you don't do anything with it. At a
>> pinch you might get away with using Microsoft Office carefully.
>>
>> I have experienced hundreds of false "out of memory" errors, or errors
>> of operation that look exactly like my machine has run out of memory.
>> This is at exactly the same time that the Windows Vista system reports
>> (correctly) that there is loads of memory free. Today I discovered
>> that Microsoft finally found a bug that caused this behaviour six
>> months ago, created a fix, and DID NOT RELEASE IT AS A CRITICAL
>> UPDATE. So losing all functionality is considered "not critical" by
>> Microsoft - what kind of mushroom-fueled cloud are they living on?
>>
>> Of course this is all fine as they are putting the patch in SP1. Oh,
>> except they still haven't released that to us little people (sometimes
>> called customers), after a year or more of putting up with the bug.
>> So Microsoft's idea of correct practice is to make customers put up
>> with known bugs unless they find the fix on display in the bottom of a
>> locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the
>> door saying "Beware of The Leopard". [Thanks to Douglas Adams for the
>> last quote, which seems fitting]
>>
>> "Carl" <me@theworld.universe> wrote in message
>> news:DE2B7C71-1717-4FF6-B78E-46A3794DC7F2@microsoft.com...
>
> This is why I choose to put up with lesser featured but more capable
> better running DRM free software running under Linux that I do not have
> to pay for.
So you're a thief huh? Figures.
It seems that the Vista price is more than just the cash
> outlay you pay at the store.
Please don't attempt to do math, you're far too stupid for math.
>
>>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>>> decent hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on
>>> an old 486 would you?
>>
>>

Frank
Thu May 08 15:04:30 PDT 2008

measekite wrote:

>
>
> Adam Albright wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 10:55:12 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Clear Windows" wrote in <news:482301b7$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> ... What we found was simple: With a clean install on well-supported
>>>> hardware, everything worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible
>>>> application or a flaky video, storage, or network driver, and
>>>> performance could suffer. Badly. ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tis a problem with a general-purpose computer and a user-modifiable OS
>>> that any software, whether driver or application, can fuck it up. The
>>> biggest security risk to an OS is the user.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Vista is "fucked up" out of the box BEFORE you add a damn thing.
>>
>> Don't think so? Then explain UAC oddness, Windows Explorer flakiness
>> and random slow file copying for starters. ALL can happen regardless
>> of your hardware, or third party software. So lets put the lion's
>> share of the blame where it belongs; squarely on Microsoft's doorstep.
>>
>
> The reason they are pushing for the next version of Windows so hard is
> that the majority of corporations are not purchasing Vista.

You idiot. Most large corporations are on a time scheduled
hardware/software update with both their hardware suppliers and their
software suppliers.
You're not that bright are you?
>
>> Need more proof? If Vista wasn't flawed then Microsoft wouldn't have
>> rushed out SP1 and oh by the way it doesn't resolve all that's wrong
>> with Vista. No surprise there either.
>>
>> This space reserved for the numbnuts squad that will counter by
>> dragging out the threadbare and pathetic 'all software has bugs'
>> excuse.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO!
>>
>>

Adam
Thu May 08 16:06:51 PDT 2008

On Thu, 08 May 2008 16:31:48 -0500, Milt <netrage@nospammiltsweb.com>
wrote:

>Clear Windows wrote:
>> What we found was
>> simple: With a clean install on well-supported hardware, everything
>> worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible application or a flaky
>> video, storage, or network driver, and performance could suffer. Badly.
>
>That sounds like that could describe any OS ever written. Doesn't sound
>like a Vista problem.

The "other" OS products you can buy aren't burdened with the useless
UAC, don't get mucked up with Windows Explorer, don't suffer from
Media Player shortcomings or annoy the crap out of users with dumb
things like Digital Rights Management or any of the other things
that's part of Vista right out of the box. The FACT is Vista wants to
be intrusive, untrustful and disrespectful of you the owner. So it got
three strikes against it before you even start. Only a company as
arrogant as Microsoft would be dumb enough to put such a unfinished
unpolished impractical product on the market and expect people to love
it.

google3luo359
Thu May 08 16:59:41 PDT 2008

On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on decent
> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
> would you?


Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.

I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!

softwareguy256
Thu May 08 17:33:21 PDT 2008


Some of us have good hardware, just no driver

--
softwareguy256

Adam
Thu May 08 19:05:17 PDT 2008

On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:59:41 -0700 (PDT), google3luo359@yahoo.com
wrote:

>On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on decent
>> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>> would you?
>
>
> Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
>made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
>When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
>effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
>Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>
>I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
>expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!

Well consider what Bill Gates once said:

From "Programmers at Work" by Microsoft Press, interview with Gates.

Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to
be a programmer?

Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study
great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to
the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out
listings of their operating system."

Now you know why Windows sucks. It is a composite of crap other people
threw away as useless.

nil
Fri May 09 04:31:57 PDT 2008

yet there are morons like frank who love it....

are these people just dumb or are they mental nutcases?

Well as for frank yank we know that answer.. LOL

both dumb and fruitcake!


"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:bg1724t7qijgkjbvg07sao0756epv460mb@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 08 May 2008 16:31:48 -0500, Milt <netrage@nospammiltsweb.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Clear Windows wrote:
>>> What we found was
>>> simple: With a clean install on well-supported hardware, everything
>>> worked just fine. But toss in an incompatible application or a flaky
>>> video, storage, or network driver, and performance could suffer. Badly.
>>
>>That sounds like that could describe any OS ever written. Doesn't sound
>>like a Vista problem.
>
> The "other" OS products you can buy aren't burdened with the useless
> UAC, don't get mucked up with Windows Explorer, don't suffer from
> Media Player shortcomings or annoy the crap out of users with dumb
> things like Digital Rights Management or any of the other things
> that's part of Vista right out of the box. The FACT is Vista wants to
> be intrusive, untrustful and disrespectful of you the owner. So it got
> three strikes against it before you even start. Only a company as
> arrogant as Microsoft would be dumb enough to put such a unfinished
> unpolished impractical product on the market and expect people to love
> it.
>

john
Fri May 09 04:42:11 PDT 2008


<google3luo359@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:87eef811-8452-44a7-87c1-9ba635e46947@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>> decent
>> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>> would you?
>
>
> Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
> made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
> When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
> effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
> Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>
> I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
> expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!
>
>

some priceless quotes from the brilliant minds at Microsoft:

- "Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider
Monkey." -- Bill Gates

- "If you can't make it good, at least make it look good."
-- Bill Gates on the solid code base of Win9X

- "What we've gone through in the last several years has caused some people
to question 'Can we trust Microsoft?'"
-- Steve Ballmer

- "I'm not sure how the company lost sight of what matters to our customers,
both business and home, the most, but in my view we lost our way. I think
our teams lost sight of what bug-free means, what resilience means, what
full scenarios mean, what security means, what performance means, how
important current applications are, and really understanding what the most
important problems our customers face are"
- Jim Allchin, former Platform Products and Services Group, Microsoft.

- "I would buy a Mac today if I was not working at Microsoft."
- Jim Allchin, former Platform Products and Services Group, Microsoft.

Frank
Fri May 09 10:26:15 PDT 2008

nil wrote:

> yet there are morons like frank who love it....

Translation: you're obviously too stupid to properly install, configure
and run Vista right?
>
> are these people just dumb or are they mental nutcases?

We must be smarter than a fukkin idiot like you, cause we've got Vista
running perfectly fine!
>
> Well as for frank yank we know that answer.. LOL

Let's review here ok...you, the fukkin idiot, can't get Vista to run
properly. Me, the brilliant one, has all of his installs of Vista
Ultimate running perfectly fine.
Hummm...who is the idiot moron now?
>
> both dumb and fruitcake!

So it's you huh?...LOL!
We all knew that a long time ago, chicko!...LOL!
Frank
>

measekite
Fri May 09 10:48:13 PDT 2008

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Frank wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:48248936$0$30523$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite">nil wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">yet there are morons like frank who love
it....
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Translation: you're obviously too stupid to properly install, configure
and run Vista right?
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
are these people just dumb or are they mental nutcases?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
We must be smarter than a fukkin idiot like you, cause we've got Vista
running perfectly fine!
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Well as for frank yank we know that answer.. LOL
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Let's review here ok...you, the fukkin idiot, can't get Vista to run
properly. Me, the brilliant one, has all of his installs of Vista
Ultimate running perfectly fine.
<br>
Hummm...who is the idiot moron now?
<br>
</blockquote>
<i><u><font color="#ff0000"><big><b>Definitely you. ha ha ha ha BTL!</b></big></font></u></i><br>
<blockquote cite="mid:48248936$0$30523$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
both dumb and fruitcake!
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
So it's you huh?...LOL!
<br>
We all knew that a long time ago, chicko!...LOL!
<br>
Frank
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

Frank
Fri May 09 11:01:59 PDT 2008

meashershithead, the idiot of all times wrote:

---------------------------------------------

What are you doing here meashershithead? You don't know anything about
XP or Vista or ink or printers or paper or taking photos or life for
that matter.
Get some help loser!...LOL!
Frank

Canuck57
Fri May 09 12:37:40 PDT 2008


<google3luo359@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:87eef811-8452-44a7-87c1-9ba635e46947@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>> decent
>> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>> would you?
>
> Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
> made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
> When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
> effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
> Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>
> I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
> expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!

Didn't Bill Gates say 640K of RAM ought to be enough for anyone?

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates

To quote:

"I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was
providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt
like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it
took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real
problem."

LOL.

Guess he didn't envision Vista at 17% of 8GB on my machine either.

My prediction was closer, I would retire when we had 4 CPU @ 4GHz with 4GB
RAM and 4TB of disk storage as standard. Getting pretty close, have 4 core
CPUs, and 8GB or RAM. Now for 4TB disk (2 x 2TB will do) and GHz and I can
retire. People then thought I was crazy back in 1985 when I first said
this. But I might work longer than this if I still like it.

Canuck57
Fri May 09 12:45:15 PDT 2008


"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:56c724p87hvec5h95ibit80oh6li8n4a7f@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:59:41 -0700 (PDT), google3luo359@yahoo.com
> wrote:
>
>>On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>>> decent
>>> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>>> would you?
>>
>>
>> Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
>>made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
>>When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
>>effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
>>Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>>
>>I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
>>expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!
>
> Well consider what Bill Gates once said:
>
> From "Programmers at Work" by Microsoft Press, interview with Gates.
>
> Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to
> be a programmer?
>
> Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study
> great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to
> the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out
> listings of their operating system."
>
> Now you know why Windows sucks. It is a composite of crap other people
> threw away as useless.

It is also an admission if intellectual theft by Bill. But then everything
in MS-Windows is borrowed or lifted.

And what they did invent never worked right. If anyone does not believe
that, turn on NETBUI and turn off TCP.

I wonder if they will ever fix Vista. My guess is not.

Frank
Fri May 09 12:54:59 PDT 2008

Canuck57 wrote:
> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
> news:56c724p87hvec5h95ibit80oh6li8n4a7f@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:59:41 -0700 (PDT), google3luo359@yahoo.com
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>>>
>>>>But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>>>>decent
>>>>hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>>>>would you?
>>>
>>>
>>>Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
>>>made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
>>>When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
>>>effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
>>>Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>>>
>>>I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
>>>expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!
>>
>>Well consider what Bill Gates once said:
>>
>>From "Programmers at Work" by Microsoft Press, interview with Gates.
>>
>>Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to
>>be a programmer?
>>
>>Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study
>>great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to
>>the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out
>>listings of their operating system."
>>
>>Now you know why Windows sucks. It is a composite of crap other people
>>threw away as useless.
>
>
> It is also an admission if intellectual theft by Bill. But then everything
> in MS-Windows is borrowed or lifted.

Wow! You've really got that MS hate FUD cranked all the way up today!
>
> And what they did invent never worked right. If anyone does not believe
> that, turn on NETBUI and turn off TCP.
>
> I wonder if they will ever fix Vista. My guess is not.

Let's see...you're an unemployed, proly unemployable supposed IT who
can't get one little install of Vista to run properly.
I don't think anyone with a brain gives a shit about your 'guesses'....LOL!
Frank

Frank
Fri May 09 12:56:28 PDT 2008

Canuck57 wrote:

> <google3luo359@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:87eef811-8452-44a7-87c1-9ba635e46947@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
>>On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>>
>>>But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to, on
>>>decent
>>>hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an old 486
>>>would you?
>>
>>Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
>>made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
>>When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
>>effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
>>Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>>
>>I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
>>expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!
>
>
> Didn't Bill Gates say 640K of RAM ought to be enough for anyone?
>
> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates
>
> To quote:
>
> "I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was
> providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt
> like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it
> took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real
> problem."
>
> LOL.
>
> Guess he didn't envision Vista at 17% of 8GB on my machine either.
>
> My prediction was closer, I would retire when we had 4 CPU @ 4GHz with 4GB
> RAM and 4TB of disk storage as standard. Getting pretty close, have 4 core
> CPUs, and 8GB or RAM. Now for 4TB disk (2 x 2TB will do) and GHz and I can
> retire. People then thought I was crazy back in 1985 when I first said
> this. But I might work longer than this if I still like it.
>
>
hehehe...it must piss the hell out of you knowing where BG is today
compared with where you are!...LOL!
Frank

wrat
Fri May 09 14:29:58 PDT 2008

In article <fR1Vj.128104$Cj7.115091@pd7urf2no>,
Canuck57 <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote:
>
>And what they did invent never worked right. If anyone does not believe
>that, turn on NETBUI and turn off TCP.
>

Netbeui works perfectly well for small scale local lan
resource sharing. It's not meant to be an enterprise networking
protocol.

measekite
Fri May 09 14:39:20 PDT 2008

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Frank wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:48249195$0$30526$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite">meashershithead, the idiot of all times wrote:
<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------
<br>
</blockquote>
The imbecile forgot to quote what measekite wrote so here it is: <br>
<br>
You all need to know what a moron he is.&nbsp;&nbsp; He is also known as Frankie
Crankie and LOL!<br>
<br>
Does anyone else have other names for him that he is known for.<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Frank wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:48248936$0$30523$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite">nil wrote: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">yet there are morons like frank who love
it.... <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Translation: you're obviously too stupid to properly install, configure
and run Vista right? <br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
are these people just dumb or are they mental nutcases? <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
We must be smarter than a fukkin idiot like you, cause we've got Vista
running perfectly fine! <br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
Well as for frank yank we know that answer.. LOL <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Let's review here ok...you, the fukkin idiot, can't get Vista to run
properly. Me, the brilliant one, has all of his installs of Vista
Ultimate running perfectly fine. <br>
Hummm...who is the idiot moron now? <br>
</blockquote>
<i><u><font color="#ff0000"><big><b>Definitely you. ha ha ha ha BTL!</b></big></font></u></i><br>
<blockquote cite="mid:48248936$0$30523$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
both dumb and fruitcake! <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
So it's you huh?...LOL! <br>
We all knew that a long time ago, chicko!...LOL! <br>
Frank <br>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:48249195$0$30526$4c368faf@roadrunner.com"
type="cite"><br>
What are you doing here meashershithead? You don't know anything about
XP or Vista or ink or printers or paper or taking photos or life for
that matter.
<br>
Get some help loser!...LOL!
<br>
Frank
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

measekite
Fri May 09 14:40:43 PDT 2008



Frank wrote:
> Canuck57 wrote:
>> "Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
>> news:56c724p87hvec5h95ibit80oh6li8n4a7f@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 8 May 2008 16:59:41 -0700 (PDT), google3luo359@yahoo.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On May 8, 10:51 am, "Carl" <m...@theworld.universe> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But it's in the first paragraph of the article that was linked to,
>>>>> on decent
>>>>> hardware Vista runs fine. You wouldn't dream of putting XP on an
>>>>> old 486
>>>>> would you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of "an old 486", I will never forget a comment John Dvorak
>>>> made in a computer magazine about 15 years ago.
>>>> When the 486's were just hitting the market he said something to the
>>>> effect of "Who in the world would ever need all that power?"
>>>> Like it was complete and utter overkill over a 386.
>>>>
>>>> I remember reading that and saying to myself, how can a computer
>>>> expert with his knowledge and vision make such a statement!
>>>
>>> Well consider what Bill Gates once said:
>>>
>>> From "Programmers at Work" by Microsoft Press, interview with Gates.
>>>
>>> Interviewer: Is studying computer science the best way to prepare to
>>> be a programmer?
>>>
>>> Gates: "No, the best way to prepare is to write programs, and to study
>>> great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to
>>> the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and I fished out
>>> listings of their operating system."
>>>
>>> Now you know why Windows sucks. It is a composite of crap other people
>>> threw away as useless.
>>
>>
>> It is also an admission if intellectual theft by Bill. But then
>> everything in MS-Windows is borrowed or lifted.
>
> Wow! You've really got that MS hate FUD cranked all the way up today!
>>
>> And what they did invent never worked right. If anyone does not
>> believe that, turn on NETBUI and turn off TCP.
>>
>> I wonder if they will ever fix Vista. My guess is not.
>
> Let's see...you're an unemployed, proly unemployable supposed IT who
> can't get one little install of Vista to run properly.
> I don't think anyone with a brain
If brains were dynamite
LOL! would not have enough to blow his nose.
> gives a shit about your 'guesses'....LOL!
> Frank

Frank
Fri May 09 15:08:14 PDT 2008

meashershithead, the austrian fascist pig wrote:

-------------------------------------------

Nothing but his usual stupid, incoherent bullshit!...LOL!
Frank

Adam
Fri May 09 15:08:53 PDT 2008

On Fri, 09 May 2008 10:26:15 -0700, Frank <fb@signm.crt> wrote:

>nil wrote:
>
>> yet there are morons like frank who love it....
>
>Translation: you're obviously too stupid to properly install, configure
>and run Vista right?
>>
>> are these people just dumb or are they mental nutcases?

>We must be smarter than a fukkin idiot like you, cause we've got Vista
>running perfectly fine!

All you confirmed is you only use your computer to download pictures
of people having sex with sheep. For that Vista works pretty good I
guess.

Frank in action:

http://www.ltlf.co.uk/derby/man_with_sheep.jpg

Adam
Fri May 09 15:09:59 PDT 2008

On Fri, 09 May 2008 11:01:59 -0700, Frank <fb@signm.crt> wrote:

>meashershithead, the idiot of all times wrote:
>
>---------------------------------------------
>
>What are you doing here meashershithead? You don't know anything about
>XP or Vista or ink or printers or paper or taking photos or life for
>that matter.
>Get some help loser!...LOL!
>Frank


Frank know how to do a sheep:

http://www.ltlf.co.uk/derby/man_with_sheep.jpg

measekite
Fri May 09 16:44:52 PDT 2008



Adam Albright wrote:
> On Fri, 09 May 2008 11:01:59 -0700, Frank <fb@signm.crt> wrote:
>
>
>> meashershithead, the idiot of all times wrote:
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------
>>
>> What are you doing here meashershithead? You don't know anything about
>> XP or Vista or ink or printers or paper or taking photos or life for
>> that matter.
>> Get some help loser!...LOL!
>> Frank
>>
>
>
> Frank know how to do a sheep:
>
AH ha ha ha ha BTL!
> http://www.ltlf.co.uk/derby/man_with_sheep.jpg
>
>

VanguardLH
Fri May 09 19:44:43 PDT 2008

"Frank" wrote in <news:482378ee$0$3377$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:

> measekite wrote:
>> The reason they are pushing for the next version of Windows so hard is
>> that the majority of corporations are not purchasing Vista.
>
> You idiot. Most large corporations are on a time scheduled
> hardware/software update with both their hardware suppliers and their
> software suppliers.
> You're not that bright are you?

You're beating on a brain-dead horse. He has never been involved in
corporate purchasing, leasing, or IT so he hasn't any concept of what
corporations are doing.

Adam
Fri May 09 20:08:36 PDT 2008

On Fri, 9 May 2008 21:44:43 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

>"Frank" wrote in <news:482378ee$0$3377$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:
>
>> measekite wrote:
>>> The reason they are pushing for the next version of Windows so hard is
>>> that the majority of corporations are not purchasing Vista.
>>
>> You idiot. Most large corporations are on a time scheduled
>> hardware/software update with both their hardware suppliers and their
>> software suppliers.
>> You're not that bright are you?
>
>You're beating on a brain-dead horse. He has never been involved in
>corporate purchasing, leasing, or IT so he hasn't any concept of what
>corporations are doing.


Are you dumb enough to think the idiot Frank does? If Frank really has
a business at best he's pushing a hot dog cart around or he's a pimp
for over 70 prostitutes with one leg. Frank isn't smart enough to wipe
his own ass. So he doesn't bother.

VanguardLH
Fri May 09 21:35:33 PDT 2008

"Adam Albright" wrote in
<news:364a24h0gc5cm7qdvco7b8gc1luu9hpc7a@4ax.com>:

> Are you dumb enough to think the idiot Frank does? If Frank really has
> a business at best he's pushing a hot dog cart around or he's a pimp
> for over 70 prostitutes with one leg. Frank isn't smart enough to wipe
> his own ass. So he doesn't bother.

Careful. With such a response, you're putting a foot into the cart that
you claim Frank is pushing around.

When I saw "Frank", I was thinking of Frank Saunders so I was giving to
Frank the reputation of Frank S. I haven't bothered to read enough of
Frank's post to postulate my own opinion of him, and I rarely base that
postulation on what others think of a poster. Sometimes I'll go Google
Group hunting to find a poster's history but "Frank" is way too
non-descriptive and weak a moniker for me to bother checking his
history.

Frank
Fri May 09 22:58:58 PDT 2008

VanguardLH wrote:
> "Adam Albright" wrote in
> <news:364a24h0gc5cm7qdvco7b8gc1luu9hpc7a@4ax.com>:
>
>
>>Are you dumb enough to think the idiot Frank does? If Frank really has
>>a business at best he's pushing a hot dog cart around or he's a pimp
>>for over 70 prostitutes with one leg. Frank isn't smart enough to wipe
>>his own ass. So he doesn't bother.
>
>
> Careful. With such a response, you're putting a foot into the cart that
> you claim Frank is pushing around.
>
> When I saw "Frank", I was thinking of Frank Saunders so I was giving to
> Frank the reputation of Frank S. I haven't bothered to read enough of
> Frank's post to postulate my own opinion of him, and I rarely base that
> postulation on what others think of a poster. Sometimes I'll go Google
> Group hunting to find a poster's history but "Frank" is way too
> non-descriptive and weak a moniker for me to bother checking his
> history.

Well, that stupid POS drunken mr pig has no idea what he is talking
about (as we all know).
I used to be a front li