> All PC users that I know and speak with refer to
> Vista as Vista. They never preface Vista with the
> word Windows. It is always simply Vista. They
> will say Windows XP, they will say Windows 98, they
> will say Windows 2000, but it is always simply Vista
Interesting observation, but
> There was a grain of truth in it as we have seen
> MS's efforts to run away from the name Vista:
> first with "Mojave" and now with the "Windows 7"
> moniker.
Nah.
"Mojave" was just an advertising gimmick designed to highlight the fact
that, given no predisposition to hate it, users like Vi
> The point is that they are rushing the new release
> to push Vista over the Horizon
I just don't see any evidence that this is an accurate statement. As I said,
it will have been over three years since the release of Vista if the
currently announced ship date (January 2010) is met. That hardly
> I've got a little feeling that had Vista really caught on in a big
> way, MS could well have decided to stick with that moniker.
That's certainly possible, but it doesn't make the ad any less false.
*
** List info, subscr
> All this really shows is that VFBs are a humorless lot.
Yeah, there's just one minor flaw in your theory: I already said it was
funny.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy
> a nerd is a most honorable god position. just below zeus and helios,
> but above all the rest.
Yeah. And -way- better than "geek."
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, ca
> Have you seen the latest two Apple ads? They call
> attention to MS's huge budget for enhancing its
> image and small budget for fixing its crappy
> software.
I've seen them, and they are, as always, funny. But this time the reason
they are funny is that they're so ridiculous. How many Apple a
> The TV commercials I've seen are at about a 1:1 ratio between Apple
> and MS
Nah. Maybe in the last month or so the ratio has been closer, but I still
see a LOT more Mac ads than MS ads.
But more importantly, the Apple ads have been running since 2006, and they
are ubiquitous. You cannot avoid
> The MS ads are not memorable so you might get the impression that there
> are fewer.
So, you are seriously saying that there have been more MS ads than Mac ads,
total, over the last two years. Seriously? You are seriously saying that?
> The ads basically say "we are fat, happy, and pompous, wi
> Do you seriously mean to say that they are not fat, happy, and pompous?
Of course not. They are only two of the three. You have to guess.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** poli
Subject: RE: [CGUYS] Windows 7
> 7 by all reports is no depature at all from Vista.
> This was MS's plan for some time, to start releasing
> OS's in smaller increments instead of these five
> year jumps.
I am out here in sunny LA with 25,000 other sheeplike MS developers at
the MS PDC (Profession
Subject: RE: [CGUYS] Windows 7
> Either way I think this shows MS and the NYT's can't count.
What they're saying is that it's actually based on the internal version
number, which most users aren't even aware of:
2000:5.0
XP: 5.1
Server 2003: 5.2
Vista: 6.0
So I think the "
> What we want to know is if will still be bloated.
I know I can always count on you to add something useful to the
discussion.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness
> Have you seen demos for the Quebec RC yet? I'd
> be curious how little hardware that can run on.
No, sorry.
> MS is being smart to focus on performance and
> lower hardware reqs, but they can definitely
> clean up the GUI and navigation.
Oh, there are a lot of improvements to the UI. It's
Here's a decent walkthrough of some of the new Win7 stuff:
http://tinyurl.com/5n3akw
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguy
>> Here's a decent walkthrough of some of the new
>> Win7 stuff:
>
> Since half of the features will never make it to
> the shipping version is there really any point in
> reading their propaganda?
Oh, give it a rest.
I'm wondering if you bothered to go to the site because, if you had, you
w
> If Microsoft puts features in just as they ship, it won't be surprising
> that they won't work well.
> I don't think that's what they do.
Right, I think that's Mike's point--that is NOT what they're doing. MS insists
that Win7 is already feature-complete, and that the rest of the time will be
> I do question if the testing they will get in
> house will be as effective as a large number
> of outside testers. There will be beta tests
> of components but not of the really half done
> things that have been released to bets before.
But nothing is "half done". The stuff that wasn't deliv
> This "radical departure" is just claptrap from
> MS's PR department. Nothing to do with engineering.
You know this, how?
You weren't at PDC. I was. I talked at length with the coders. Not PR
people; not executives; the guys who write Windows. They told me what they
are doing. I saw what they h
> what is NTFS?? Well, I see it is a "file system," but what is that?
It's how the files are organized on the disk. In the PC world there are two
primary file systems, FAT and NTFS. FAT is the older system; it uses
somewhat less space and is OK for smaller drives, but for larger drives the
newer N
> but, i still don't understand.
> to me, a file system is Windows Explorer.
> so, obviously we're talking about different things!
The file system is what Windows Explorer explores. :)
(Well, sorta. It explores other stuff too, but mainly you're looking at
stuff that the file system has organized
> an OS that demos well but falls apart in real use.
Apparently you are ignoring my several statements that I have Win7 on my
primary machine and am using it for all my daily work with zero problems. Or
perhaps that fact was rejected because it conflicts with your worldview.
It's actually fun wa
> Chris I am intrigued that you are running it.
>
> How does it compare to XP?
Well, I hate having to use an XP machine. But then, I already liked Vista,
so I don't know how much that would mean to you. :)
Seriously, it looks a lot like Vista. It's faster, and the organization is
better, but it
> Vista was not found to be any more secure than XP.
This is just flat-out wrong, as is most of the rest of your message, which
appears to be remarkably ill-informed. As if everyone didn't already know
that Vista is more secure than XP, I received an InfoWorld article just this
morning with the fo
> The article is completely unclear about what data
> supports MS's assertion.
That's strange, it was pretty clear to me.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a
> There's no 'automatic' way to tag, because the
> software doesn't know if that's Uncle George or
> which vacation it was.
Actually, Picasa does know if it's Uncle George. It's obviously not
completely reliable, but it works better than I expected.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/09/02/picasa-r
> Lacking that, is there any applet that is readily accessible (e.g., in
> the systray; on the start menu is too hard) for quickly changing the
> default browser for the launch of one URL and then changing it back
> again?
I haven't tried it, but this looks like it will do the job, at least for XP
> First tell her to not use Outlook.
Nonresponsive. The question was, "how do I?".
> Outlook offers nothing uniquely useful for a home user.
That's true, unless you count email, calendar/appointments/reminders,
contacts, fax, mailing lists, tasks/to-do lists, RSS, and notes.
My wife's life wo
> >Nonresponsive. The question was, "how do I?".
>
> Who's really being "Nonresponsive"? If you were doing this to yourself
> that would be another matter. We might laugh at your quaint ideas, but
> since you were only hurting yourself we would let you go ahead. We
> might even help you do it as a
Sigh.
> Computerworld's hands-on review wants to call it
> Windows 6.5 and says it is largely a big bug fix
> with a few new features thrown in.
It says it is "largely a big bug fix"? Really? Where? Where does it say
that? Where does it even *mention* bugs? Please be specific.
You somehow mana
> I don't always agree with Mr. Piwowar, or in how he puts things,
> but I think he is pointing out that a free MS anti-virus app could
> soon dominate the PC world
The key word here, I think, is "could". MS offers plenty of free stuff that
doesn't dominate the PC world (see: Outlook Express, Wind
> Another reason why we don't want MS to bundle a free
> anti-virus program. It will just make it easier for
> the virus writers.
>
> Nice to know whose side MS is really on.
So, by providing free AV software, MS is on the side of the virus writers?
The logic behind this just boggles the mind.
> What do you think the reviewer is telling you by calling Win7 version
> 6.5? He does that in the FIRST SENTENCE! He calls it "Vista with the
> kinks worked out" in the SECOND PARAGRAPH!
You think that either of those can be fairly rephrased as "Win7 is largely a
big bug fix"? Seriously?
Here's
> Does that qualify as an underhanded, manipulative dirty trick? I think
> so.
So, here's our summary of TomWorld for today:
Adding free stuff to Windows stinks. Removing free stuff from Windows...also
stinks (even if users can still get the free stuff IF THEY WANT IT).
You, sir, are hard to pl
> Which means sometime in early 2010 should be realistic.
Probably not. All indications are that it will be released in time for
Christmas 2009 sales, which means shipping considerably earlier in the year,
maybe as early as August. Win7 is already feature-complete, so they are only
working on bug
> This time the tech press seems to have done a better
> job at accurate reporting than certain persons
> posting here.
Somehow you keep failing to note that the review is overwhelmingly positive.
So, if you mean that the review is, in fact, more positive than what
"certain persons" have posted
> If you consider "not as crappy as the previous version" to be high
> praise, I guess your could call it "overwhelmingly positive." However,
> most of are not wearing rose-colored glasses.
-Only- could read that article and summarize it is "not as crappy as the
previous version".
**
> 1) "Windows 7 is a more functional" means "Parts of Vista
> were severely broken. Win 7 fixes some of this."
>
> 2) "more efficiently designed" means "Vista was a pig,
> needing much more RAM and much faster processors. Win
> 7 fixes some of this."
>
> 3) "with far more attention paid to the
> Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean you aren't being followed
True enough, but Mr. P. is in Loopy Land with that post. I expect the next
one will claim that MS is behind the black helicopters and the hoaxed moon
landings.
*
>>> The is goal is to move people to the cloud where most
>>> believe tech is headed.
>>
>> Let's all give a hearty "baa" for the Windows sheeple
>> as they happily trot off to be shorn.
>
> Don't forget that mac baaa or whatever you MFB do...apple
> is headed that way too.
And now IBM.
http
Occasionally shoes do go on other feet:
"Apple's attempt to quash an effort to help the latest iPods and iPhones
work with non-Apple software such as the Linux operating system is out of
line, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said Tuesday."
http://www.cio.com/article/print/466225
**
> It was discussing it. Under DMCA merely doing that is a crime.
I don't think so. They weren't trying to crack the DRM, just the library
database. In other words, they weren't trying to get at the tunes, just the
-list- of tunes. I admit to not having read the DMCA in its entirety, but
I'd be pre
William Gillis is suing Apple over the "twice as fast for half the price"
iPhone 3G ads.
Apple responds, in the 5th affirmative defense:
"Any statements made by Apple were truthful and accurate and were not
misleading or deceptive ... and could not have been reasonably understood by
Plaintiff ...
> Is not his beef with the AT&T network? I'm puzzled why Apple is getting
> dragged into this
I assume it's because Apple that was advertising the speed, not AT&T.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archiv
> This from the UK:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7749435.stm
>
> More lies and half-truths. The BBC is/are out of control.
I'm confused...how is the BBC out of control? A lot of UK news organizations
are reporting this. I don't understand what lies and half-truths you're
referring to
> Could my previous comment been an example of...sarcasm???
D'oh...must get more coffee...
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://w
>> "::1" is the IPv6 equivalent to 127.0.0.1, always the local machine.
>
> Uh-oh. I wonder if this could be trouble in the future? But what the
> heck am I supposed to do except delete it? And doesn't anyone else
> have this in their Vista hosts file?
Yes, I have it, and my hosts works fine. I s
> So what's the point of trying to add ::1 back? Paranoia? Maybe. But in
> fact, after adding it back just now, the hosts file is still working
> perfectly! WTF
I don't have the answers to these questions, not really being an expert in
this area. Hopefully someone else who knows more about it
> >"::1" is the IPv6 equivalent to 127.0.0.1, always the local machine.
>
> Does this mean the Vista's IPv6 implementation leaves something to be
> desired?
Does -what- mean that Vista's IPv6 implementation leaves something to be
desired?
> If having IPv6 addresses in the hosts file causes problems (at least
> sometimes) in Vista, it implies that you have to be careful with IPv6
> in Vista.
>
> Just having "localhost" in your hosts file should not cause any
> problems.
>
> So it seems like this is one of those times where there is
> You can't boot from an external drive that's only connected with USB2.
Get a PC.
(I'm so sorry...I just couldn't resist it...)
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmne
> Since the addressability was tested using ping from the command line,
> casting blame on FireFox or "something else" is a bit of a stretch.
Right, Tom, the only thing is that, given the information that Tony
provided, the pingback doesn't prove anything one way or the other because
we don't know
> There was a thread on Mac-L a while back where people were having
> some slow internet response times that were fixed by disabling the
> "Configure IPv6" in the Network control panel of Mac OS X from
> "Automatically" to "Off".
Does this mean the OS X's IPv6 implementation leaves something to be
> I'm not a Vista user so I don't get so metaphysical
> about how my computer operates. I don't accept maybes.
> It either works or it doesn't work.
Anyone who cares to can re-read my message and satisfy themselves that this
is a complete misrepresentation of what I said. The "maybes" were there
> Can one of our poor Vista unfortunates please run
> the ping test in Safe Mode so we can rule out evil
> third-party software's attempts to make Vista look bad?
There's no point to this. I already said that I pinged in -normal- mode and
it was fine. I did exactly what Tony said he did, and the
> you guys should stop arguing about inadequacies in Vista
Tony, the problem is that people read this list. If no one says anything,
those people will take home the "fact" that Vista's IPv6 support is no good,
because Tom says so. We don't know that from your situation, and it's a
point worth disp
> There are only 6 of them (out of some 10,000), and
> checking one shows it later in the list twice
Good lord, Spybot put ten thousand entries in your hosts file? Have you
noticed any effect on performance?
*
** List
> For a database in the cloud, Amazon on Dec 1st added
> a threshold for billable use. The threshold is fairly
> high so much useful work should be free.
This is interesting, but anyone thinking of putting a lot of reliance on its
being free should be aware that Amazon is only promising that it
> I realize you'll probably just start covering your ears and screaming
> WFB! WFB!...but...how does a 5% lead make it 147%?
Yahoo / MS * 100 = 147%
That's a 47% lead, not 147%, but this one time I am willing to chalk it up
to an honest misstatement. Just this once, though.
Personally, I'm not s
> > Yahoo / MS * 100 = 147%
>
> No.
>
> Yahoo / MS = 1,311,504 / 885,567 = 1.48097659 = 148%
> 148% * 100 = 14800% or 148. Yahoo's share isn't 148 times more than MS'
> share. It just seems that way.
>
> Yahoo's share is 148% of MS share, or Yahoo's share is 48% more than MS
> share. MS still su
> Notice how they don't want to address the issue so distract us with
> math problems instead. Baa!
I guess you missed the part where I said that I don't understand why anyone
uses MS search?
In any event, the math/terminology for this is well established. Yahoo's
share is 148% of MS's. You can a
"A Russian businessman has trademarked the ;-) emoticon used to convey a
wink in text messages and email.
"Oleg Teterin, president of the mobile ad company Superfone, said Thursday
he doesn't plan on tracking down individual users following the decision by
the federal patent agency. 'This is on
> Original formula is incorrect. Yahoo share is 1.48 [or 1.47] times MS
> share, not 148 [or 147] times MS share.
>
> Simple arithmetic:
> 1,311,504 / 885,567 = ~1.48 = 148% [48% higher] - correct
>
> (1,311,504 / 885,567) * 100 = ~148 = 14800% [4800% higher] - incorrect
Not to belabor the po
> I haven't been following this thread. What's "YOY" anyway?
It's bidness-ese for Year-Over-Year, i.e., the change from one year to the
next.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** po
> Now I see my mistake, I forgot to apply the super secret sauce of
> double standard. Silly me.
>
> MS/shipped = misleading bad guys
> Apple/shipped + secret sauce = bright and shiny
You forgot to mention what a sound business plan it is for near-bankrupt
retailers to stock and display large qu
>> That's a two year old review comparing the now "Classic" iPod
>> with essentially the same Zune of today.
>
> Oranges to oranges: comparing comparable models is an honest
> evaluation.
Also, although the Zune hardware hasn't changed a whole lot, the firmware
has been greatly enhanced. It can d
> What? We were having a quasi-rational discussion
> actually comparing iPods and Zunes, and you break
> out the labels and say how some of us are dirty
> iPod-lovers out to smear the Zune?
My reference was to the earlier discussion; I thought that was clear from my
use of the past tense. I ap
> Particularly nice is that these upgrades worked on -all- Zune owners,
D'oh. Obviously that should have been FOR all Zune owners, not ON all Zune
owners.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, priva
My understanding of PAE (or AWE, as it's known in Windows) is that its only
effect is to allow individual applications to use physical memory above
4GB--and the applications must be specifically coded to do so. I doubt that
many are, since there are so few x86 systems with more than 4GB.
IOW, it w
> Actually, I have a single folder on the desktop, which contains
> shortcuts to all my apps. I find it's a lot easier to look for
> something in the folder, to include the usual Windows Search. But the
> folder only contains shortcuts for launching the principal
> applications
You know you can
> >Eventually, you'll want to go in and set her up
> >as a User, since apparently by default the owner is
> >still inexplicably an Admin.
>
> That so the help won't have to respond to things that "don't work"
> because of improperly-set permissions. Just give the user the maximum
> permissions.
> I find the start menu difficult to deal with when
> it is too large and has to be scrolled to find something. Yes, I know
> I can orgainze the start menu hierarchically, but I've never taken the
> trouble to do so.
Right, I'm suggesting that it might be "worth the trouble". I've found that
(fo
> Why are you scrolling at all? Why not use the search box?
Well, for one thing I can't always remember the name of the program I need.
:)
For me, a simple two-level menu has turned out to be the best solution. I
have top level menus for audio, video, imaging, financial, communications,
and a fe
> but the really interesting story is the $199 EFI-X USB Boot Module
> (www.macintouch.com/reviews/efix). Apparently you can plug this into
> any PC and it creates an environment that runs OS X with very few
> compromises. Runs fast too. I'll buy that!
This really is interesting, but I'm not sure
> Meanwhile my 1st Gen iPod keeps on ticking.
As do the Zunes.
Only you could take what -looks- like a fairly minor software glitch and
understand that it is actually a massive MS conspiracy. Those are some evil,
evil dudes, Tom; it is good that we have you to show us the truth.
***
> You may consider it minor, because they are coming out with a fix for
> it. Some may consider major because it disables the device.
> However, I think none of us are happy when a device is disabled.
Well, that's fair enough, but I'm calling it minor because (a) it's
temporary, (b) the Z
> >http://coreygo.com/index.php/2008/12/31/how-to-temporarily-fix-the-
> zune-30s-z2k9-woes/
>
> Fine, except that:
>
> 1) Requires disassembly of the Zune, voiding the warrenty.
>
> 2) He reports that 1/3 of the time his procedure completely erases the
> contents of the Zune.
A point you didn'
> 424 years later MS is still playing catchup. Will a patch be ready for
> 2012?
It sure is a good thing for you that Apple software is completely bug-free,
otherwise this would seem rather silly and childish.
*
** List inf
> When Apple had a similar problem with the iPhone we
> called it "bricking" (turning our expensive toy into
> the equivalent of a brick) and it was not acceptable
> at all. We gave Apple hell.
And you accused them of intentionally creating the glitch to sell more
stuff. Right?
*
> >> When Apple had a similar problem with the iPhone we
> >> called it "bricking" (turning our expensive toy into
> >> the equivalent of a brick) and it was not acceptable
> >> at all. We gave Apple hell.
> >
> >And you accused them of intentionally creating the glitch to sell more
> >stuff. Righ
> No. The point of the matter is that MS created a music player who's
> operation is somehow critically intertwined with the number of days in
> the year. I can't imagine how the number of days in the year could be
> critical for the function of playing music
I'm speechless. This is simply laugha
>> DRM probably is the answer to M$ woes in Zune2K9 debacle.
>> It needs to be able to know your license is current for
>> the subscription service. Can't have you hearing licensed
>> music after your license has expired.
>
> It is just like designing electronic door locks that won't
> open wh
> Hey it is a best guess and I stated it that way
Yes, you did, but Tom didn't; his message assumed that it was a fact. That's
why I responded to him and not to you.
> We bitch when Apple screws up too
Yes, but Tom bitches differently for Apple and MS. MS's mistakes all have
one of two possible
> It is amazing how far some people will go to defend their one true
> love.
> No it is not acceptable for MS to migrate its piss-poor software
> engineering practices to the realm of MP3 players (a.k.a. embedded
> controllers). People who write embedded controllers are expected to do
> a
> far bet
> But you went after my point not anything that Tom said.
I re-read my message, and I can see how you could have read it that way. My
intent, however, was to point out that Tom's message assumed that the
problem was, in fact, DRM-related (which, again, I very much doubt):
"It is just like designi
> Interesting thing popping up on some forums. It's
> starting to look like it wasn't just the zune that
> was affected but also other mp3 players which used
> the freescale cpu
Looks like it. Some guy found the source code for the clock driver
(apparently it's on the Freescale web site), and
> So your kid comes home with an "F" on his math test. He
> says "It's not my fault, I copied from Johnny's paper."
> You say "Next time copy from someone who's smarter."
You understand that this is analogy is completely bogus, right? You want to
use analogies, try to use ones that make sense:
> DRM probably is the answer to M$ woes in Zune2K9
> debacle. It needs to be able to know your license
> is current for the subscription service. Can't
> have you hearing licensed music after your license
> has expired.
As we now know, and as I suspected in earlier messages, this is not the
c
> You may think it is all right for the vendor to
> take a "see no evil" attitude. I don't.
So, it is your position that Apple analyzes the microcode on all components
it purchases, including the CPUs?
By the way, have you now officially dropped your contention that MS did this
on purpose?
***
> As you say, turning off Windows Update is only
> partially effective. MS ignores the setting as it
> pleases.
That's a bit of an overstatement. MS should not have done what it did--and I
complained about it--but "as it pleases" isn't accurate.
Stealth updates have occurred twice that I'm awar
> Intel's management remarked that Apple was all over
> them before switching to their processors and pushed
> them to do some things differently. Verizon passed
> on the iPhone because Apple as "too intrusive."
So they asked for stuff (MS does too, not that this would make any
difference to yo
> Statements that include terms like "every," "all," "none," "always," or
> "never" usually have the answer built into the question. Your
> ridiculous, stacked-deck question is unworthy.
As Mike notes, you have finally answered the question, rather circuitously,
with "No, Apple does not check ever
> In the case of a essential calendaring component, it would be
> reasonable to assume that this would include checking various
> critical dates, like Dec 31, Jan 1 for every year and Feb 29, Mar 1
> for leap years
The problem is, so much is "essential." You may be able to find a few things
like "
> Because it is virtually impossible for *everyone* to
> check *everything* you want to absolve MS from
> checking even the simplest things.
You sure do know how to exaggerate. As I'm sure you well know, that is not
at all what I said. What I said was, "You can't test everything," which is
rather
> I am currently the test manager for an enterprise system.
> We test every functional requirement.
Rigorous testing is a requirement, and I'm certainly not suggesting
otherwise. The company I do most of my consulting for is extremely
aggressive in its testing.
But are you saying that you manuf
> From my brief reading up on the internet and talking to
> 2 friends, I thought some differences are: 1) you can
> hand write on a notebook and 2) notebooks don't usually
> have internal drives. Is that not the case? I'll have
> to read up on netbook as well.
Notebook is the term du jour f
> >Why does every news story on this site except the one about the
> macbook
> >appear to be a parody? Or rather, why is a serious story mixed in
> with all
> >these gags?
>
> You're kidding, right? It's the Onion! EVERYTHING is a parody,
> albeit, in the case of the Mac Wheel, an extremely well-
> Testing is iterative, and good testing should find as
> many flaws as possible (errors and design flaws) and
> cannot end until every thing is correct.
I'm not disagreeing with you that extensive testing is a must. Of course it
is. But ensuring that "everything is correct", while an admirable
> If you don't try to test until everything is correct, you
> will suffer later. My testing finds A LOT. As close to
> everything as I'm likely to get.
Agreed. But you can't find everything, which is what the Other Poster seems
to want MS to do.
> I said Apple's experience designing and testi
> MS has depressed your expectations so much that I see
> you are willing to accept anything they dish out.
> Insisting that MS rarely makes such mistakes is ridiculous
Nice job of refuting things I never said...
*
** Lis
101 - 200 of 1047 matches
Mail list logo
