Re: Windows XP is MUCH better than Windows Vista

On Oct 19, 11:05 am, "Shenan Stanley" <newshel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> steve wrote:
> > and here are just a few of the problems that prove this to be very
> > true:
>
> > 1) Incompatibility (Driver/Software handshaking issues)
> > Nearly everything ran super smooth in XP from day one
> > It was a root canal getting even some of the simplest software to
> > run in Vista
>
> Were you a Windows 9x/ME/Windows 2000 user when Windows XP first came out?

XP had nearly every driver when I bought it about a year after it was
released. Vista, almost a year after it was released still struggles.

> New OS means that many hardware manufacturers (and software writers) will
> choose not to support older models (or versions) on the New OS and you will
> either buy the new version of their product too or make some other choice to
> make it work for you.

That depends on how advanced the OS is from the last version's build.

>
> > 2) Desktop Convolution
> > It's a "Muddy appearance." Everything looks the same. You cannot
> > easily distinguish if you are looking at a folder or an I-net site.
> > It's a horrible experience just looking your screen.
>
> Similar complaints have been lodged against Windows XP - when it was first
> released. Everything keeps becoming more and more 'bubbly' and
> 'crayola-fied' in all OSes.

Prolly not 1/10th as many complaints about XP. Wait till the dust
settles on Vista and then google "Vista Sux" and see if I'm right.
Were there lawsuits being filed against XP like there are with Vista?
No.

>
> > 3) Instability
> > XP crashed on me once in over five years.
> > Vista crashed the first day!
>
> That means you did not change things much (hardware or software), you were
> very luck and your experience is limited.

Obviously you don't know me from adam.

> Supporting thousands of Windows
> XP machines with just as many different combinations of hardware/peripherals
> and applications

I have three separate builds of XP on a half dozen computers and all
ran fine from day one. XP has ran smoothly for me and many others for
years. More like XP than Vista. Just google around like I did.

>Windows XP is pretty annoying at times - particularly 5+ years ago.

Has there ever been software that Gates made that wasn't annoying at
times?

>
> > The list goes on and on. I haven't the time to waste commenting on
> > Gates shotty work.
>
> If you think Gates has much to do with the actual OS... That's funny. heh

No, but I don't know pedro the programmer. Who do you blame, the
janitor?

>
> > MS is infamous for peddling half-baked software. XP was the
> > exception. It is wonderful. MS hit a wall with Vista, a solid
> > cement wall.
>
> Many would disagree with you about XP.

Most agree, google my friend.

> All of this is opinions and personal
> experience.

What isn't personal experience? Even "techie gurus" have to experience
it (duh).

> If you talk to the right people, BeOS was the OS to end all
> OSes.

Talk? I'll take personal experience over talk.

>
> > Gates should have stuck with XP and simply added features, but the
> > temptation for profit once again won out (Gates can make much more
> > money with a new OS than simply improving past software).
>
> Why do you keep mentioning Bill Gates personally?

Ok that damn MS janitor is sick.

> If only one person wrote
> the OS, I could see it - maybe - but this seems more of a personal vendetta
> on your part

Yeah, a vendetta against rotten software.

>- and not a logical attack with research and backup ABOUT an
> OS.
I used Vista and it failed. Nothing illogical or non researching about
that.
I actually USED it thoroughly inside and out. Get it? Research what?
You are the one that lacks researching. Heard of google yet? Enter
this into Google's search box: Vista "Class Action Lawsuit." You'll
be enlightened.

> Everyone is welcomed to their opinion - feel free to express yours. In X
> more years, people will complain about the next OS just like they did five
> years in the past. Change sucks - especially when it is a change over which
> no one entity has complete control. Millions of hardware combinations with
> thousands of manufacturers, millions of software combinations with thousands
> of software writers - all who get to choose what they will/will not
> support/do.

> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP

LMAO. You actually work for MS?! I'm reporting you to the janitor for
ragging on XP!!

steve wrote:
> On Oct 19, 11:05 am, "Shenan Stanley" <newshel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> steve wrote:
>>> and here are just a few of the problems that prove this to be very
>>> true:
>>
>>> 1) Incompatibility (Driver/Software handshaking issues)
>>> Nearly everything ran super smooth in XP from day one
>>> It was a root canal getting even some of the simplest software to
>>> run in Vista
>>
>> Were you a Windows 9x/ME/Windows 2000 user when Windows XP first
>> came out?
>
> XP had nearly every driver when I bought it about a year after it
> was released. Vista, almost a year after it was released still
> struggles.
>
>> New OS means that many hardware manufacturers (and software
>> writers) will choose not to support older models (or versions) on
>> the New OS and you will either buy the new version of their
>> product too or make some other choice to make it work for you.
>
> That depends on how advanced the OS is from the last version's
> build.
>
>>
>>> 2) Desktop Convolution
>>> It's a "Muddy appearance." Everything looks the same. You cannot
>>> easily distinguish if you are looking at a folder or an I-net
>>> site. It's a horrible experience just looking your screen.
>>
>> Similar complaints have been lodged against Windows XP - when it
>> was first released. Everything keeps becoming more and more
>> 'bubbly' and 'crayola-fied' in all OSes.
>
> Prolly not 1/10th as many complaints about XP. Wait till the dust
> settles on Vista and then google "Vista Sux" and see if I'm right.
> Were there lawsuits being filed against XP like there are with
> Vista? No.
>
>>
>>> 3) Instability
>>> XP crashed on me once in over five years.
>>> Vista crashed the first day!
>>
>> That means you did not change things much (hardware or software),
>> you were very luck and your experience is limited.
>
> Obviously you don't know me from adam.
>
>> Supporting thousands of Windows
>> XP machines with just as many different combinations of
>> hardware/peripherals and applications
>
> I have three separate builds of XP on a half dozen computers and all
> ran fine from day one. XP has ran smoothly for me and many others
> for years. More like XP than Vista. Just google around like I did.
>
>> Windows XP is pretty annoying at times - particularly 5+ years ago.
>
> Has there ever been software that Gates made that wasn't annoying at
> times?
>
>>
>>> The list goes on and on. I haven't the time to waste commenting on
>>> Gates shotty work.
>>
>> If you think Gates has much to do with the actual OS... That's
>> funny. heh
>
> No, but I don't know pedro the programmer. Who do you blame, the
> janitor?
>
>>
>>> MS is infamous for peddling half-baked software. XP was the
>>> exception. It is wonderful. MS hit a wall with Vista, a solid
>>> cement wall.
>>
>> Many would disagree with you about XP.
>
> Most agree, google my friend.
>
>> All of this is opinions and personal
>> experience.
>
> What isn't personal experience? Even "techie gurus" have to
> experience it (duh).
>
>> If you talk to the right people, BeOS was the OS to end all
>> OSes.
>
> Talk? I'll take personal experience over talk.
>
>>
>>> Gates should have stuck with XP and simply added features, but the
>>> temptation for profit once again won out (Gates can make much more
>>> money with a new OS than simply improving past software).
>>
>> Why do you keep mentioning Bill Gates personally?
>
> Ok that damn MS janitor is sick.
>
>> If only one person wrote
>> the OS, I could see it - maybe - but this seems more of a personal
>> vendetta on your part
>
> Yeah, a vendetta against rotten software.
>
>> - and not a logical attack with research and backup ABOUT an
>> OS.
> I used Vista and it failed. Nothing illogical or non researching
> about that.
> I actually USED it thoroughly inside and out. Get it? Research what?
> You are the one that lacks researching. Heard of google yet? Enter
> this into Google's search box: Vista "Class Action Lawsuit." You'll
> be enlightened.
>
>> Everyone is welcomed to their opinion - feel free to express
>> yours. In X more years, people will complain about the next OS
>> just like they did five years in the past. Change sucks -
>> especially when it is a change over which no one entity has
>> complete control. Millions of hardware combinations with
>> thousands of manufacturers, millions of software combinations with
>> thousands of software writers - all who get to choose what they
>> will/will not support/do.
>
>> Shenan Stanley
>> MS-MVP
>
> LMAO. You actually work for MS?! I'm reporting you to the janitor
> for ragging on XP!!

You obviously don't know as much as you think if you believe I work for
Microsoft. Maybe you don't Google as much as you could.

As far as the rest:

- Blaming Bill Gates is still childish at best. Microsoft is a company. No
one forced you to utilize anything they sell. You chose to get involved at
some level - because you *could* just walk away... Microsoft and drivers -
perhaps you do not understand reality on this one - Microsoft produces the
OS - not the hardware. The drivers come from the hardware providers. If
you do not have a driver for some piece of hardware - that's a new person
(whomever is the president of the comapny when it started I guess is who you
go for - not who is president when you are having the trouble) you have to
blame. Utilize *nix and see if it has drivers for everything. I'm sure
your research will discover the person to name/blame for each flavor. ;-)

- As far as not knowing you, you are correct. But 1/2 dozen computers is
still not much. You don't know me either.

- If you google for XP sucks - you will find many archived messages about XP
reflecting the same trouble(s). Some of them current. Some things don't
work except in Vista. It is the third party manufactuyrer that gets to make
this determination. ;-)

- Windows Vista has not been out a year - so you buying XP a year later and
it having 'nearly every driver' is a bunch of crud/FUD - after all -
Microsoft does not release the drivers - that is up to the manufacturer and
up to TODAY there are still pieces of hardware not supported by their
manufacturer in Windows XP. Older machines/hardware are almost always left
in the dust. Windows 95 --> Windows 98 did it. Windows 98 --> Windows XP
did it. Windows XP --> Windows Vista did it. The difference is that as
those have progressed - so have the number of people using computers and the
number of people who don't even know life without a computer. More people
will equal more complaints because that hjust increases the number of
combinations of hardware/software they run.

- The only way to get personal experience is communication. Just because
your personal experience sucked doesn't mean your friends/family had the
same experience. There are people out there who *do* disagree with you
about XP. There are people out there who *do* disagree with you about
Vista.

- Did you try your google search? See the XP results? Heard of the EU? XP
Sucks too. Windows 98 Sucks. *nix sucks. OS X sucks. Someone out there
thinks so. Someone might even sue for it. Heck - some have bought coffee
(HOT COFFEE - the default state for morning coffee) and spilled it on
themselves and then sued (and won) against those who sold it to them for not
warning them the coffee was hot and might burn them if it contacted the
skin.

If you wish to go through life blaming individuals that have nothing to do
with the problem and expressing your opinion in such a way - that's your
choice. *shrug* It doesn't bother me at all. I just thought I would see
if you were rational or not.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

On Oct 27, 7:22 am, "Shenan Stanley" <newshel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> steve wrote:
> You obviously don't know as much as you think if you believe I work for
> Microsoft.

Pssst newsflash, MS like all major companies are highly
departmentalized and your department is miles from the software
department, and your lack of knowledge confirms it too. You are simply
an annoying MR PR rep, that's it. Stop being so proud. You obviously
don't know Vista OS like I do or you are one big liar. And this
statement is provable simply by sampling all the thousands Vista
complaints already logged in Google.

If you are trying to tell me that my experience with Vista was a happy
one, quit now. I can write a book on all the problems with Vista, 9
months after it's release.

> Maybe you don't Google as much as you could.

No, again, "obviously" that's your problem. Class action lawsuits have
been filed against Gates for Christ's sake. Wake up.

>
> As far as the rest:
>
> - Blaming Bill Gates is still childish at best. Microsoft is a company.

Pssst. Newsflash for the MS spokeslady deparment: Gates is the CEO of
Microsoft. Vista is a Bill Gates product whether you like it or not.
Vista was, at minimum, okayed by Gates himself. When HIS (GATES)
company makes a faulty product like Vista, who do you feel should take
the heat? Is not gates ultimately responsible for who works at MS??
Should he not oversee major end products? Of course. HE (WILLIAM GATES
III) let this stinker loose on an unsuspecting public .. and you
defend such pathetic business ethics is doubly pathetic. You cannot
own up to the fact that Vista sucks. Why not admit it and say "we're
working hard to render it." Your dishonesty or lack of knowledge
shows.

> No one forced you to utilize anything they sell.

Pssst, in order to test Vista on your PC, you have to actually go out
and purchase it *duh*. So you're saying "don't buy anything Bill Gates
peddles."

> You chose to get involved at
> some level - because you *could* just walk away... Microsoft and drivers -
> perhaps you do not understand reality on this one - Microsoft produces the
> OS - not the hardware. The drivers come from the hardware providers. If
> you do not have a driver for some piece of hardware - that's a new person
> (whomever is the president of the comapny when it started I guess is who you
> go for - not who is president when you are having the trouble) you have to
> blame. Utilize *nix and see if it has drivers for everything. I'm sure
> your research will discover the person to name/blame for each flavor. ;-)

My research has been already conducted and the jury has already made
it's verdict:
"Vista was released totally convoluted and unfinished."

So stop making yourself out to be dumber than you might already be by
backing such terrible sofware.

>
> - As far as not knowing you, you are correct. But 1/2 dozen computers is
> still not much.

Running a piece of software on Six PCs is 10000 times more revealing
than "doing research" which is what you've suggested earlier. And why
did you clip out the CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST VISTA, A BILL GATE'S
PRODUCT from the rest of that statement??

Six PCs running smoothly on XP and one PC running terribly on Vista
and class

> You don't know me either.

Never claimed I do. But I know you don't know vista or are glossing
over all the Vista problems so many end users know about.

>
> - If you google for XP sucks - you will find many archived messages about XP
> reflecting the same trouble(s). Some of them current. Some things don't
> work except in Vista. It is the third party manufactuyrer that gets to make
> this determination. ;-)

Yes, many Vista complaints are VERY current and VERY valid. You're
learning.

>
> - Windows Vista has not been out a year - so you buying XP a year later and
> it having 'nearly every driver' is a bunch of crud/FUD - after all -

It's a fact. No crud. FYI, XP wasn't a giant leap from Windows 98 so
that's why things ran rather smoothly from it's release date.

> - The only way to get personal experience is communication.

Where did you get that nonsense from? You mean to tell me you actually
believe that it's better not to actually experience something first
hand, but instead to read what other's say about it?? How old are you?
You're logic is as good as Vista, and both are from MS, isn't that a
surprise.

> Just because
> your personal experience sucked doesn't mean your friends/family had the
> same experience. There are people out there who *do* disagree with you
> about XP. There are people out there who *do* disagree with you about
> Vista.

People who disagree that Vista sucks are as bright as yourself or lie
as much and mean zip. Sorry, but that's the reality.

>
> - Did you try your google search? See the XP results? Heard of the EU? XP
> Sucks too. Windows 98 Sucks. *nix sucks. OS X sucks. Someone out there
> thinks so.

Someone means zip. Millions means a lot. Personal experience means a
lot.
Your logic is in a grave condition, like Vista.

> If you wish to go through life blaming individuals that have nothing to do
> with the problem and expressing your opinion in such a way - that's your
> choice. *shrug* It doesn't bother me at all. I just thought I would see
> if you were rational or not.

For the last time, Bill Gates has something to do with the products
released by Microsoft until the day he quits. Sorry you lose on every
account.

> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP

So insulting MS clients is what Gates pays you to do? Not impressed,
nor surprised.

> How To Ask Questions The Smart Wayhttp://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart->questions.html- Hide quoted text -

How to return MS Vista OS, send the receipt to:

RE: MICROSOFT PRODUCT RETURN
2031 Buroughs Ave.
San Leandro, CA 94577
(888) 673-8624

The refund process is the only feature of Vista that actually works.

<snipped>
See the entire thread forever here:
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...bebccd9704e6e5


steve wrote:
> Pssst newsflash, MS like all major companies are highly
> departmentalized and your department is miles from the software
> department, and your lack of knowledge confirms it too. You are
> simply an annoying MR PR rep, that's it. Stop being so proud. You
> obviously don't know Vista OS like I do or you are one big liar.
> And this statement is provable simply by sampling all the thousands
> Vista complaints already logged in Google.
>
> If you are trying to tell me that my experience with Vista was a
> happy one, quit now. I can write a book on all the problems with
> Vista, 9 months after it's release.

Hint: You are a moron if you still believe I work for Microsoft.

I have been using Vista since pre-beta.

I am not trying to tell you *your* experience with Vista. I am telling you
that it is unique to you (unless you over-generalize it - as just 'good' or
'bad') and although you are welcomed to your opinion - don't think it is the
only one out there.

steve wrote:
> Pssst. Newsflash for the MS spokeslady deparment: Gates is the CEO
> of Microsoft. Vista is a Bill Gates product whether you like it or
> not. Vista was, at minimum, okayed by Gates himself. When HIS
> (GATES) company makes a faulty product like Vista, who do you feel
> should take the heat? Is not gates ultimately responsible for who
> works at MS?? Should he not oversee major end products? Of course.
> HE (WILLIAM GATES III) let this stinker loose on an unsuspecting
> public .. and you defend such pathetic business ethics is doubly
> pathetic. You cannot own up to the fact that Vista sucks. Why not
> admit it and say "we're working hard to render it." Your dishonesty
> or lack of knowledge shows.

Hint: Bill Gates is *not* currently the CEO of Microsoft. I am thinking of
rephrasing my first statement to be more certain of your ranking.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...mspx?group=a-d

Steve Ballmer
Chief Executive Officer

Bill Gates
Chairman

You still think I work for Microsoft. Microsoft and I have no direct
relationship. I use their products, support the products (amongst others)
in my job (which is not with Microsoft in any way) and freely give my time
on public newsgroups such as these to help people who might be having
trouble - when I can.

Vista may *suck* in your opinion. That's all it is - a single opinion. I
don't recommend it - but I say it is not ready for the business world -
however, people buying their first computer system - no prior experience
beyond possibly work - will likely be fine with Vista.

I am not working hard on rendering anything to do with Vista - that is not
my job. I support many people who use Windows workstations, I manage many
Windows, *nix, Solaris, OSX and other types of servers. Microsoft is
involved only in the fact that some of the OSes are Microsoft OSes.
Otherwise - if they faded to nothing and were replaced by macs - my job
would still be the same and I would still be happily doing what I already
do.

steve wrote:
> Pssst, in order to test Vista on your PC, you have to actually go
> out and purchase it *duh*. So you're saying "don't buy anything
> Bill Gates peddles."

Well - maybe. You can get trial versions, try it out 'online' - get someone
to setup a virtual machine for you to try, etc. You could even - if you are
so inclined - download it illegally and install it. What you do is up to
you. Ignorance of the options proves nothing but lack of research. What
you buy should be based on your research, your trying out things online, at
a friends house, your looking up the support for what OS you are going to
utilize from each vendor you currently have computer products from, etc.
Anything less is putting your full confidence and trust in someone else to
do something *for* you.

What's with the 'pssst stuff? Oh - you are trying to be funny. Gotcha.
Yes - I am definitely reconsidering a rephrase of my first statement.

steve wrote:
> My research has been already conducted and the jury has already made
> it's verdict:
> "Vista was released totally convoluted and unfinished."
>
> So stop making yourself out to be dumber than you might already be
> by backing such terrible sofware.

Backing it? Not even close. For most people who are NOT buying a new
computer - I recommend against Vista. For people in Business - I recommend
against Vista. Buying a new computer - completely new everything? I have
nothing against you getting Vista. Go for it. Especially if you are
unfamilar with computers.

Showing that you have only one opinion of millions - which may be, in
general - the same as many people and different from many other people?
Sure. You have an opinion. Way to go.

steve wrote:
> Running a piece of software on Six PCs is 10000 times more revealing
> than "doing research" which is what you've suggested earlier. And
> why did you clip out the CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST VISTA, A BILL
> GATE'S PRODUCT from the rest of that statement??
>
> Six PCs running smoothly on XP and one PC running terribly on Vista
> and class

I snipped nothing out. Gate's again. Wow. That first phrase is looking
more and more like a certainty.

I have had hundreds of completely identical machines running Windows XP
smoothly before. Then one - not. Change out a memory chip and everything
is better. I have also had to replace the OS on a much less homogeneous
setup and some of the machines only had 128MB memory or a 500MHz CPU or an
8MB video card or combinations of such low stats - and even with a clean
install, Windows XP would not run as well on these older machines. Windows
98/98SE/ME worked fine. Blame Microsoft? Blame Bill Gates? Blame Windows
XP? I could have. Didn't - because I was trying to run something more
advanced on something less advanced than its better working counterparts.
Products where the manufacturer chose not to support it in XP. Etc...

steve wrote:
> Never claimed I do. But I know you don't know vista or are glossing
> over all the Vista problems so many end users know about.

Really? I guess phonics does not teach comprehension - only how to read.

I do not recommend Vista in most cases - there are problems with Vista. I
do recommend Windows XP - but there are problems with Windows XP. I utilize
and support Windows XP, Windows 2003, Windows Vista, Mac OS X, various
flavors of *nix and Solaris daily.

steve wrote:
> It's a fact. No crud. FYI, XP wasn't a giant leap from Windows 98 so
> that's why things ran rather smoothly from it's release date.

Hah. How incorrect can one person be? There are still people using Windows
98 for the very reasons you have hinted at for Vista sucking. Driver
support, speed of the system, issues they could not get over between their
stuff and Windows XP. Windows 98 worked fine, still does - so they have not
upgraded. Whole LARGE corporations still running Windows 2000... Because
they cannot move or will not for whatever reason.

Windows 98 and Windows XP have little to nothing in common beyond some eye
candy. Windows XP is even based off the NT line of products - where the
Windows 9x series died with Windows ME.

> For the last time, Bill Gates has something to do with the products
> released by Microsoft until the day he quits. Sorry you lose on
> every account.

So do millions of others (have something to do with the products and their
success/failure from Microsoft). And how do I lose? I have nothing to
gain/lose from this conversation. Microsoft can disappear and my life only
changes in which products I support daily - and even then - it is more a
shift towards one I already support and away from the MS one's as they fade
away.

Let me help you out with the signature I utilize here:
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/

I do not work for Microsoft. I could care less what happens to Microsoft.
If you wish to continue proving the density of your skull - after this reply
of mine - I leave you to do so alone. Know that *your* specific reasons for
disliking Vista are your own. There may be some people out there with
similar experiences - but I guarantee there are just as many with completely
differing opinions/reasons for liking/disliking Vista. You are *not* the
end-all of... likely anything.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

On Oct 27, 3:18 pm, "Shenan Stanley" <newshel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snipped>

> Hint: You are a moron if you still believe I work for Microsoft.

How so? The mere mention of Bill Gates seems to make your mouth froth
like a hungry dog.

>
> I have been using Vista since pre-beta.

Whoopie.

>
> I am not trying to tell you *your* experience with Vista. I am telling you
> that it is unique to you (unless you over-generalize it - as just 'good' or
> 'bad') and although you are welcomed to your opinion - don't think it is the
> only one out there.

"Unique" ?

Vista sux. End of topic.


> Hint: Bill Gates is *not* currently the CEO of Microsoft. I am thinking of
> rephrasing my first statement to be more certain of your ranking.http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...mspx?group=a-d

Are you saying Bill Gates doesn't own MS and has zero say?
You can be funnier than that.

>
> Steve Ballmer
> Chief Executive Officer
>
> Bill Gates
> Chairman

Bravo.

> You still think I work for Microsoft.

No, actually I could care less. It doesn't matter. What counts is what
you post here and most is just wrong.

> Vista may *suck* in your opinion.
No opinions needed. Many of the problems have been clearly illustrated
by many other end users as I've said here ad nauseum.

> That's all it is - a single opinion.

BS
> I don't recommend it - but I say it is not ready for the business world -
> however, people buying their first computer system - no prior experience
> beyond possibly work - will likely be fine with Vista.

VISTA SUCKS. Spit it out. Don't beat around the bush and ride the
fence.

> I am not working hard on rendering anything to do with Vista - that is not
> my job. I support many people who use Windows workstations, I manage many
> Windows, *nix, Solaris, OSX and other types of servers. Microsoft is
> involved only in the fact that some of the OSes are Microsoft OSes.
> Otherwise - if they faded to nothing and were replaced by macs - my job
> would still be the same and I would still be happily doing what I already
> do.
>

> Yes - I am definitely reconsidering a rephrase of my first statement.

Rephrase all of them and stop wasting other people's time with your
nonsense and lies.

> Showing that you have only one opinion of millions - which may be, in
> general - the same as many people and different from many other people?
> Sure. You have an opinion. Way to go.

?

> I have had hundreds of completely identical machines running Windows XP
> smoothly before.

Identical = 1. And I believe you own 100s of PCs too.

> Then one - not. Change out a memory chip and everything
> is better.

?
You make zero sense again.

> steve wrote:
> > Never claimed I do. But I know you don't know vista or are glossing
> > over all the Vista problems so many end users know about.
>
> Really? I guess phonics does not teach comprehension - only how to read.

?

> > It's a fact. No crud. FYI, XP wasn't a giant leap from Windows 98 so
> > that's why things ran rather smoothly from it's release date.
>
> Hah. How incorrect can one person be? There are still people using Windows
> 98 for the very reasons you have hinted at for Vista sucking.

People use anything. Extremely few still use 98. Make some sense
sometime.

> I do not work for Microsoft. I could care less what happens to Microsoft.

Obviously you don't care. That's the difference. I do care what Gates
puts out, because I'm forced to be an end user of his OS due to his
vast OS Monopoly.

> If you wish to continue proving the density of your skull - after this reply
> of mine - I leave you to do so alone. Know that *your* specific reasons for
> disliking Vista are your own. There may be some people out there with
> similar experiences - but I guarantee there are just as many with completely
> differing opinions/reasons for liking/disliking Vista. You are *not* the
> end-all of... likely anything.

Bottom line Vista SUCKS and if you cannot get over that fact, I feel
sorry for you as you struggle with it. XP runs much, much smoother and
is much much much more of a happy experience.

>
> --
> Shenan Stanley
> MS-MVP

You mean:
"I don't work for MS" MS-MVP someone with too much time.