A trip down memory lane..

"Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1USdnJeIHA.288@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year 2000
>>>> :
>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of any
>>>> special graphics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's Hardware.
>>>>
>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy (
>>>> but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all over.
>>>>
>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around because
>>>> of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP as early as
>>>> 2004 or 2005.
>>>>
>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and relies on
>>>> year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in 3rd partie
>>>> software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you will never be
>>>> able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>
>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a and
>>>> what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's marketing
>>>> buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>
>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new PCs I
>>>> don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>
>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I always
>>>> resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>
>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the year
>>>> 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released, people will
>>>> say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put Codename here<" ..
>>>>
>>>> Some things never change
>>>>
>>>> Sascha.
>>>
>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they were
>>> ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing. The
>>> amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is normal and
>>> should be accepted.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>
>
> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it worked
> perfectly. XP SP2 was when XP should have been released. Updating it since
> then is not a bad thing, just as updating a final release of Ubuntu is not
> a bad thing.
>
> Alias


A day after it was released, some patches came down the tubes, and they have
been doing this since 7.10 was first released. If I didn't know better, I
would think that Ubuntu users are being treated like guinea pigs for an OS
that clearly wasn't ready..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e1USdnJeIHA.288@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of
>>>>> any special graphics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>
>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy
>>>>> ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all
>>>>> over.
>>>>>
>>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around
>>>>> because of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP
>>>>> as early as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>>
>>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and
>>>>> relies on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in
>>>>> 3rd partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you
>>>>> will never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a
>>>>> and what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>>
>>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new
>>>>> PCs I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>>
>>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>>
>>>>> Some things never change
>>>>>
>>>>> Sascha.
>>>>
>>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it
>> worked perfectly. XP SP2 was when XP should have been released.
>> Updating it since then is not a bad thing, just as updating a final
>> release of Ubuntu is not a bad thing.
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> A day after it was released, some patches came down the tubes, and they
> have been doing this since 7.10 was first released. If I didn't know
> better, I would think that Ubuntu users are being treated like guinea
> pigs for an OS that clearly wasn't ready..
>

But you do know better and it worked fine right out of the box.

Alias

Alias wrote:

> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>
>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>
>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>> 2000 :
>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of
>>>> any special graphics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's Hardware.
>>>>
>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy
>>>> ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all
>>>> over.
>>>>
>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around
>>>> because of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP
>>>> as early as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>
>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and relies
>>>> on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in 3rd
>>>> partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you will
>>>> never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>
>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a and
>>>> what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>
>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new PCs
>>>> I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>
>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>
>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>
>>>> Some things never change
>>>>
>>>> Sascha.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>>
>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>
>
> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it worked
> perfectly.

That's funny...considering the fact that after I installed it there were
over 150 updates.
What was that all about? You seem to be having a real problem with the
truth. But you've always been like that haven't you.
Frank

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>
>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>
>>>
>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>
>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year 2000 :
>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of any
>>> special graphics.
>>>
>>>
>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's Hardware.
>>>
>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP "gold"
>>> CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy ( but don't
>>> go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all over.
>>>
>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around because of
>>> Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP as early as 2004
>>> or 2005.
>>>
>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and relies on
>>> year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in 3rd partie
>>> software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you will never be
>>> able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>
>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a and
>>> what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's marketing
>>> buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>
>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new PCs I
>>> don't see the need for such actions.
>>>
>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I always
>>> resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>
>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the year
>>> 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released, people will
>>> say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put Codename here<" ..
>>>
>>> Some things never change
>>>
>>> Sascha.
>>
>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they were
>> ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing. The
>> amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is normal and
>> should be accepted.
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>
Of course Ubuntu required updates and fixes after its initial release. But
it essentially WORKED when it was released from beta testing. The same can
not be said for Vista. That's why everyone is still waiting for SP1 and
then will be waiting even longer for SP2.

Cheers.

--
Vista will make you speechless!
http://tinyurl.com/38zv7x

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.

Q: What OS is built for lusers?
A: Which one requires running lusermgr.msc to create them?

Frank, hard at work on his Vista computer all day:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war...tm/compost.htm

Frank wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>
>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>
>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of
>>>>> any special graphics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>
>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy
>>>>> ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all
>>>>> over.
>>>>>
>>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around
>>>>> because of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP
>>>>> as early as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>>
>>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and
>>>>> relies on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in
>>>>> 3rd partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you
>>>>> will never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a
>>>>> and what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>>
>>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new
>>>>> PCs I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>>
>>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>>
>>>>> Some things never change
>>>>>
>>>>> Sascha.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it
>> worked perfectly.
>
> That's funny...considering the fact that after I installed it there were
> over 150 updates.
> What was that all about? You seem to be having a real problem with the
> truth. But you've always been like that haven't you.
> Frank

You never installed Ubuntu and the "150 updates" is proof. ALL OSes have
updates, Frank, but XP and Vista were released before they were ready
for prime time.

Alias

"Mark L. Ferguson" <MarkLFerguson@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:2FEEE61A-2008-45F9-A47B-1211D4BFDCF7@microsoft.com...
> Yep. "640K ought to be enough for anyone." : )
>
> --
> Was this helpful? Then click the "Yes" Ratings button. Voting helps the
> web
> interface.
> http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales....htm#RateAPost
>
> Mark L. Ferguson
>
> .
> "Sascha Jazbec" <sascha77ha123@123hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6BEF95FE-5038-4382-A16F-C149CF1C7675@microsoft.com...
>>
>>
>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>
>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>
>>
>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>
>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year 2000 :
>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of any
>> special graphics.
> ...
>> Sascha.
>


At the time, it was.. :-)

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

"Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
news:ejGl22JeIHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Frank wrote:
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of
>>>>>> any special graphics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy
>>>>>> ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all
>>>>>> over.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around because
>>>>>> of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP as early
>>>>>> as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and relies
>>>>>> on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in 3rd
>>>>>> partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you will
>>>>>> never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a and
>>>>>> what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new PCs
>>>>>> I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some things never change
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sascha.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>>>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it worked
>>> perfectly.
>>
>> That's funny...considering the fact that after I installed it there were
>> over 150 updates.
>> What was that all about? You seem to be having a real problem with the
>> truth. But you've always been like that haven't you.
>> Frank
>
> You never installed Ubuntu and the "150 updates" is proof. ALL OSes have
> updates, Frank, but XP and Vista were released before they were ready for
> prime time.
>
> Alias

When I installed Ubuntu 7.10 there were 190 available updates. To bad it
totally screwed the install after it updated.

"Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
news:uSE2kyJeIHA.3724@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e1USdnJeIHA.288@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands of
>>>>>> any special graphics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and enjoy
>>>>>> ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and incompatibility all
>>>>>> over.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around because
>>>>>> of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP as early
>>>>>> as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and relies
>>>>>> on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in 3rd
>>>>>> partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you will
>>>>>> never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a and
>>>>>> what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here and
>>>>>> there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on new PCs
>>>>>> I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some things never change
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sascha.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point of
>>>> release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it worked
>>> perfectly. XP SP2 was when XP should have been released. Updating it
>>> since then is not a bad thing, just as updating a final release of
>>> Ubuntu is not a bad thing.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> A day after it was released, some patches came down the tubes, and they
>> have been doing this since 7.10 was first released. If I didn't know
>> better, I would think that Ubuntu users are being treated like guinea
>> pigs for an OS that clearly wasn't ready..
>>
>
> But you do know better and it worked fine right out of the box.
>
> Alias


Vista worked right out of the box for me. I was part of the beta test, and
have used Vista exclusively since November 2006..

There isn't an OS that hasn't needed continual work, nor any piece of
software, and if the 'guinea pig' law applies to Windows, it surely applies
to everything else.



--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Alias wrote:
> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>
>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e1USdnJeIHA.288@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands
>>>>>> of any special graphics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and
>>>>>> enjoy ( but don't go online ) - you will see bugs and
>>>>>> incompatibility all over.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should also remember that XP's Life is only still around
>>>>>> because of Vista's delayed release. Microsoft wanted to replace XP
>>>>>> as early as 2004 or 2005.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP is a good and stable OS, but it is hopelessly outdated and
>>>>>> relies on year 2000 technologies, that's the point, you can add-in
>>>>>> 3rd partie software to get near Vistas Look and features, but you
>>>>>> will never be able to copy the underlying techs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vista is more than just "Aero", think of the built-in speech
>>>>>> recognition, the preview and filter options, saveable searches a
>>>>>> and what else goodies are in there. It's a shame that Microsoft's
>>>>>> marketing buro does never seem to point out these new features.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And with the already around hotfixes and a bit of tweaking here
>>>>>> and there Vistas slowlyness can be handled on older Hardware, on
>>>>>> new PCs I don't see the need for such actions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I myself was tempted more than one time to go back to XP, but I
>>>>>> always resisted when looking at the OS with brain turned on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XP has grown up with SP2, Vista will go the same route and in the
>>>>>> year 2010 or so, when the next Windows Client will be released,
>>>>>> people will say "Vista is so much better and faster than >put
>>>>>> Codename here<" ..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some things never change
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sascha.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, MS has *always* released *all* versions of Windows before they
>>>>> were ready and used the paying public to do the final beta testing.
>>>>> The amazing thing is that you MS fanboys and girls think this is
>>>>> normal and should be accepted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And Ubuntu doesn't? So we can assume that Ubuntu 7.10 at the point
>>>> of release hasn't required any updates, fixes, minor rewrites?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but I haven't noticed any changes. When it was released, it
>>> worked perfectly. XP SP2 was when XP should have been released.
>>> Updating it since then is not a bad thing, just as updating a final
>>> release of Ubuntu is not a bad thing.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>>
>> A day after it was released, some patches came down the tubes, and
>> they have been doing this since 7.10 was first released. If I didn't
>> know better, I would think that Ubuntu users are being treated like
>> guinea pigs for an OS that clearly wasn't ready..
>>
>
> But you do know better and it worked fine right out of the box.
>
> Alias

You are really in denial aren't you?
Take it like a man...if you can...LOL!
Frank

Alias wrote:

> Frank wrote:
>
>> Alias wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Alias" <iamalias@removethisgmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:e0e73eJeIHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Sascha Jazbec wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>>> news:OXi1daIeIHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .. for the Vista bashers..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The case is as simple as one can think of :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP is designed for Computers that were common in the year
>>>>>> 2000 :
>>>>>> namely a 300-400 MhZ Cpu and memory of 128 MB Ram and no demands
>>>>>> of any special graphics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No wonder this OS will literally fly at warp speed on today's
>>>>>> Hardware.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And to anyone out there : If you happen to have the very first XP
>>>>>> "gold" CD Build 2600, without any SP1 or 2.. well install and
>>>>