1. Welcome Guest! In order to create a new topic or reply to an existing one, you must register first. It is easy and free. Click here to sign up now!.
    Dismiss Notice

BAD APPLICATION BACJGROUND COLOR CHOICES!!! NO CUSTOMIZATION, DISREGARD OF WIN SYSTEMWIDE SETTINGS!

Discussion in 'Windows Vista' started by Mark Levitski, Jun 6, 2009.

  1. Complaint for: WinLive PhotoGallery + Office PictureManager + other recent
    Microsoft products which exhibit similar nerve-breaking behavior + one Color
    problem with existing/older Windows features:

    WHY DOES IT (e.g. WL PhotoGallery) DISREGARD SYSTEM-WIDE COLOR SCHEME!?!
    I've been doing computers for @least 20 years, my permanent colorscheme is
    dark or totally Black, black background (desktop/app. window/etc), etc. I
    am a degreed (MSEE) engineer so not stupid, there's a reason many
    professionals, unlike home/children users set as many Windows elements to
    Black as possible.
    What is this fad with Microsoft in recent applications who refuse to read
    System color settings and instead insist on White background. I am so hurt
    by WinLive PhotoGallery's persistent white background, that annoys my eyes
    to the point, it will be uninstalled. Same deal with MS Office Picture
    manager which I hoped to use instead - white background & no way to
    customize. Look Microsoft, is it logical for
    you to make 2 products one of which defies another, it'd be no surprise for
    2 different companies, but you also make Windows; so what are Windows
    CLASSIC color controls for? To be overidden by some
    "dominator" applications like PhotoGallery?

    So may we ask to please add an option to either set background color (BEST),
    or add a "Black" theme (but why bother, it's easier to give customers an
    option for manually setting backgroudn color), or just adhere to Windows
    colorscheme for God's sake Windows is also made by Microsoft.
    Who is watching images or movies with intensely white background? MORONS
    WHO DON"T REALIZE THEY WILL NEED an EYE DOCTOR IN !) YEARS.
    I am an engineer and also a former developer, I spend enormous time with
    computers, and may I claim the fact that I know what I am doing in terms of
    display settings & colors. Been doing it long enough and
    my 28-year old eyes are in perfect shape despite so much compyters, that
    most Developers get glasses by 40!

    I've been holding "steam" for years but I am fed up. I will now post this
    complaint all over MS Newsgroups and email to your offices. The deal with
    applications disregarding system wide color scheme is puzzling system that
    color scheme is user-defined in Windows - which is also made by Microsoft.
    SO your right hand doesn't know what left does??
    Many professional people sit in dark rooms, with stealth black LCD's, and
    blue lighting, in my case in neighboring a UNIX lab (but I control Windows
    PC's) and an application like WindowsLive Photogallery
    which likes ot open images by default in a crazy aspect ratio, filling the
    rest of display with disgusting white filler.
    Do you ever get headaches at work? maybe too much white on your display,
    ever wondered?

    ***********************************
    THIS BUG's BEEN BUGGING US SINCE 2003!!!

    If a Black color scheme is selected in Windows-->Classic-->Advanced, then a
    very disstressing behavior occurs
    Set desktop & window backrgound to Black, font to Silver - my favorite,
    allowing to spend countless hours on the computer, yet maintaining eye
    HEALTH. Do the same with White background, white other... a headache will
    develop.
    Now goto Win Explorer or Win Mail, and sort files/emails/items by any column
    (e.g. by date). Instead of clear view (you'd expect in Classic Windows),
    you will see Whitish background + light text on it,
    totally unreadable & horrible. Impossible to focus on work. The only way
    to never see that mess, is it is to NEVER have "details" view turned on in
    WinExplorer, as of Winmail I am forced to narrow Date
    column to zero as that is the column by which usually emails are arranged.
    As you can guess it appears mutilated if you arrange by date.

    COLOR BUG CONTINUED from previous msg:
    It's one bug, but everything else is gorgeous in Windows Black color scheme,
    I've been tolerating this since 2003, but only now decided to message
    Microsoft.
    Many people know it & simply avoid "Details" view in WinExplorer, but it's
    not a solution. I used to use Details view all the time in WindowsME & NT,
    not anymore, can't..
    What happened here is that sorted-by column background color is "hardwired",
    not customizable in Appearance-->Advanced. It uses some sort of algorithm
    which fails when user selects Black background.

    And in case you wonder, Black is what you shoudl select unless you want
    brain cancer due to 10-hour work day on a computer.

    By the way, please keep Windows-->Appearance-->Advanced-->Classic option
    forever, WinXP/Vista (and Windows7?) do not have nearly as much color
    control as Classic, and if one day these customization options are gone, I
    will also be gone... to another OperatingSystem (we all kno what it is).
    Colors customization is critical to me, as I spend hours on computers):
     
  2. DanS

    DanS Guest

    For once I agree with Frank on this one.

    "Mark Levitski" <SS@nyc.rr.com> wrote in
    news:eylMgjl5JHA.1380@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

    > Complaint for: WinLive PhotoGallery + Office PictureManager + other
    > recent Microsoft products which exhibit similar nerve-breaking
    > behavior + one Color problem with existing/older Windows features:
    >
    > WHY DOES IT (e.g. WL PhotoGallery) DISREGARD SYSTEM-WIDE COLOR
    > SCHEME!?!


    The answer from Shane, an MSFT engineer, on this page:
    http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-
    US/vistamedia/thread/4ad7cd2b-1367-47d9-a8f3-f198450b7cff

    says:

    "Unfortunately the only way to change the background color in Windows
    Live Photo Gallery is to change the color scheme for all windows that you
    open. I have provided steps for doing so below. This is assuming that
    you are running Windows Vista.

    * Right-click your desktop and select Personalize
    * Click Windows Color and Appearance
    * Click the Advanced button
    * In the drop down menu underneath Item: select Window
    * In the drop down menu for Color 1: change the color to black
    * Press the OK button, and then the apply button
    * If you want to keep things this way you can press OK again"

    This is for Windows Live Photo Gallery version 2009 (Build 14.0.8064.206)

    So that version, according the the MSFT Engineer, DOES take into account
    the system-wide setting for background color.

    > I've been doing computers for @least 20 years, my permanent
    > colorscheme is dark or totally Black, black background (desktop/app.
    > window/etc), etc. I am a degreed (MSEE) engineer so not stupid,


    No, not stupid, you just think your **opinions** are right and everyone
    else is wrong.

    > there's a reason many professionals, unlike home/children users set as
    > many Windows elements to Black as possible.
    > What is this fad with Microsoft in recent applications who refuse to
    > read System color settings and instead insist on White background. I
    > am so hurt by WinLive PhotoGallery's persistent white background, that
    > annoys my eyes to the point, it will be uninstalled. Same deal with
    > MS Office Picture manager which I hoped to use instead - white
    > background & no way to customize. Look Microsoft, is it logical for
    > you to make 2 products one of which defies another, it'd be no
    > surprise for 2 different companies, but you also make Windows; so what
    > are Windows CLASSIC color controls for? To be overidden by some
    > "dominator" applications like PhotoGallery?


    Actually, a developer, even within MS, is just that, a developer. They
    can choose to do anything they damn well please with what they are doing.
    Just as a car company can design and produce any car they want. That
    doesn't mean it will be successful, or will be well-accepted, but they do
    have the right.

    It's up to you, as a consumer, to choose not to use/buy those things you
    don't like. That's how a free market works.

    > So may we ask to please add an option to either set background color
    > (BEST), or add a "Black" theme (but why bother, it's easier to give
    > customers an option for manually setting backgroudn color), or just
    > adhere to Windows colorscheme for God's sake Windows is also made by
    > Microsoft. Who is watching images or movies with intensely white
    > background? MORONS WHO DON"T REALIZE THEY WILL NEED an EYE DOCTOR IN
    > !) YEARS. I am an engineer and also a former developer, I spend
    > enormous time with computers, and may I claim the fact that I know
    > what I am doing in terms of display settings & colors. Been doing it
    > long enough and my 28-year old eyes are in perfect shape despite so
    > much compyters, that most Developers get glasses by 40!


    If you do a little Googling on this subject, you'll find that most people
    that have an opinion, favor dark text on a light background.

    And, as a matter of fact, light text on a black background, for me, like
    on a webpage, will cause me to see 'spots' for several minutes while not
    looking at it. These 'spots' are actually one large black'ish rectangle
    filled with white'ish horizontal lines. Hmmmmmm. I don't get that while
    viewing pages with a white background.

    Glasses by 40 may just be a natural progression in the aging process. How
    would you then explain all the other millions of 40+ year old's that
    don't use PC's 8 hours a day for and *still* require glasses.

    > I've been holding "steam" for years but I am fed up. I will now post
    > this complaint all over MS Newsgroups and email to your offices. The
    > deal with applications disregarding system wide color scheme is
    > puzzling system that color scheme is user-defined in Windows - which
    > is also made by Microsoft. SO your right hand doesn't know what left
    > does?? Many professional people sit in dark rooms, with stealth black
    > LCD's, and blue lighting, in my case in neighboring a UNIX lab (but I
    > control Windows PC's) and an application like WindowsLive Photogallery
    > which likes ot open images by default in a crazy aspect ratio, filling
    > the rest of display with disgusting white filler.
    > Do you ever get headaches at work? maybe too much white on your
    > display, ever wondered?


    From what I've read, it's not a white on black or black on white issue,
    its a matter of overall brightness with regards to the level of ambient
    light.

    <SNIP>

    >
    > And in case you wonder, Black is what you shoudl select unless you
    > want brain cancer due to 10-hour work day on a computer.


    That's all conjecture at this point, and even less of a concern with the
    rapid adoption of LCD display technology.

    I'd be more concerned about the RF energy we are bombarded with on a
    daily basis......from the sun, broadcast TV and radio, cell phone towers,
    etc.......but I'm not.

    Hell, I grew up and lived for 20 years the second house from a run of 60
    high tension power lines. If I didn't get leukemia or brain cancer from
    that, it won't happen from looking at a monitor using dark text on a
    light background.
     
  3. Charlie Tame

    Charlie Tame Guest

    Re: BAD APPLICATION BACJGROUND COLOR CHOICES!!! NO CUSTOMIZATION,DISREGARD OF WIN SYSTEMWIDE SETTINGS!!

    Mark Levitski wrote:
    > This application still ingores System-wide color scheme when WinVista is
    > in Classic Mode. period.
    >
    > It's a fact. I am NO Tblind!
    > Maybe your Microsoft person is working in Vista's Aero interface, but we
    > busienss people don't play Aero Trick, tips, peaks, etc.
    > I am in Classic mode, ALL MY WINDOWS have black background.
    >
    > Yet WLPG insists on whit ebackground.
    >
    > Have a nice day



    Your spelling is atrocious, your grammar awful so one wonders if you
    also use a black foreground? Might explain why for the last 20 years you
    have been so frustrated. No?
     
  4. Frank

    Frank Guest

    Re: BAD APPLICATION BACJGROUND COLOR CHOICES!!! NO CUSTOMIZATION,DISREGARD OF WIN SYSTEMWIDE SETTINGS!!

    Mark Levitski wrote:
    >> It's up to you, as a consumer, to choose not to use/buy those things you
    >> don't like. That's how a free market works.

    >
    > You're going the way of General Motors, or you're going to fix colors,
    > etc issues :)
    > And remember the reason for WIndows7 - it's a patch to alleviate your
    > sales pains with Vista crapware


    You're stupid...Windows 7 is build from/on Vista.... If you use Vista
    and have tried Windows 7, you'd know that.
    Other than some nice new features, Windows 7 (RC) is very little
    different than Vista SP2 in both form and function.
     
  5. This application still ingores System-wide color scheme when WinVista is in
    Classic Mode. period.

    It's a fact. I am NO Tblind!
    Maybe your Microsoft person is working in Vista's Aero interface, but we
    busienss people don't play Aero Trick, tips, peaks, etc.
    I am in Classic mode, ALL MY WINDOWS have black background.

    Yet WLPG insists on whit ebackground.

    Have a nice day
     
  6. Mark, one person that wants black backgrounds is not going to make Microsoft
    go the way of General Motors.

    The others here have assailed your spelling and grammar, however, your being
    here is not to get help.

    Lastly, you don't understand that the folks here are not necessarily
    Microsoft employees. Your barb just went into the air.

    "Mark Levitski" <SS@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:%23BgIPpt5JHA.3592@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
    > >It's up to you, as a consumer, to choose not to use/buy those things you
    >> don't like. That's how a free market works.

    >
    > You're going the way of General Motors, or you're going to fix colors, etc
    > issues :)
    > And remember the reason for WIndows7 - it's a patch to alleviate your
    > sales pains with Vista crapware
     
  7. >It's up to you, as a consumer, to choose not to use/buy those things you
    > don't like. That's how a free market works.


    You're going the way of General Motors, or you're going to fix colors, etc
    issues :)
    And remember the reason for WIndows7 - it's a patch to alleviate your sales
    pains with Vista crapware
     
  8. Dan,

    No offense meant but you're one of MS-crazed people who fail to read the
    original post carefully, because you're driven to promote MS.

    Did I say I've been doing it long enough?
    The Window item color1 is set to Black, has been for 7 years. All
    applications & their windows show upo with Black background, OK????
    I thought I made i tclear it's a bug.
    Your MS people insist on making us look stupid, when faced with deficiencies
    in their products.

    I HAVE HAD IT SET IN APPEARANCE-->ADVANCED->CLASSIC WHATEVER .... IT'S SET O
    BLACK, EVERYONE OBEYS THIS SCHEME EXCEPT WINDOWS LIVE PROHOT GALLERY.

    Is that difficult to accept that WLPG white background does.t care for user,
    but is hardwaired permanently?
    Add a button to change its color OR make it obey system-wide settings after
    you actually verify it obeys. Because it doesn't.
     
  9. Dan,

    You referred me to this link which by the way is not an answer because that
    MSFT Enigneer is wrong, WLPG still ingores system-wide colors for SINGLE
    PHOTO, it sets background to Black only in Slideshow mode which indicates
    one of the developers had a similar taste to mine. BTW, that blackness is
    not even due to WLPG respecting system-wide colors in thi scase, no, it's
    just how it was programmed - black for Slideshow, White for single photo,
    nobody knows why there's no option to change this insanity. This is a
    candidate for UNINSTALLATIOn now, I hate white too much to keep it on
    system.
    Here's the link:
    http://social.answers.microsoft.com...a/thread/4ad7cd2b-1367-47d9-a8f3-f198450b7cff

    But you know what's funny?

    That same link you gave us, contains several posts where people express
    their love for Black schemes contradicting your preference for White
    background. SO thanks for providing a link which now works against you:
    here's an excerpt from that webpage you referenced:

    ***********************
    I am a Photographer, and very few pictures look their best on a large white
    background, especially on a LCD Display. The light output causes the iris
    closes down so the picture looks too dark - it is survivable with light and
    colourful pictures (even if it's not optimal) but with Darker Pictures and
    Black and White pictures it's a problem.
    I can use Adobe Bridge instead, but I am disappointed that Microsoft haven't
    fixed this problem following Vista.
    If you want to test the theory, just try looking at a darker picture on a
    dark background, then look at it in photo viewer, you will see what I mean.

    Posted by:
    Bryan Wallbridge
     
  10. So you defy Microsoft themselves?
    They subliminally touted it as a fix for Vista.
     
  11. The spelkling and grammar indicate my utter disgust for spending a Saturday
    on the computer posting allover to explain somethign that bugged us for many
    years, I am too busy to even see keybaord on thsi blackberry MOBIKE device,
    I am in a car, abou tto crash.... arrghhhm try typing on a cellphone -al,
    see what spellin gt=you get!
     
  12. DanS

    DanS Guest

    "Mark Levitski" <SS@nyc.rr.com> wrote in
    news:#xXzGIu5JHA.2656@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl:

    > Dan,
    >
    > You referred me to this link which by the way is not an answer because
    > that MSFT Enigneer is wrong, WLPG still ingores system-wide colors for
    > SINGLE PHOTO, it sets background to Black only in Slideshow mode which
    > indicates one of the developers had a similar taste to mine. BTW,
    > that blackness is not even due to WLPG respecting system-wide colors
    > in thi scase, no, it's just how it was programmed - black for
    > Slideshow, White for single photo, nobody knows why there's no option
    > to change this insanity. This is a candidate for UNINSTALLATIOn now,
    > I hate white too much to keep it on system.
    > Here's the link:
    > http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vistamedia/thread/4ad7
    > cd2b-1367-47d9-a8f3-f198450b7cff
    >
    > But you know what's funny?
    >
    > That same link you gave us, contains several posts where people
    > express their love for Black schemes contradicting your preference for
    > White background. SO thanks for providing a link which now works
    > against you: here's an excerpt from that webpage you referenced:
    >
    > ***********************
    > I am a Photographer, and very few pictures look their best on a large
    > white background, especially on a LCD Display. The light output causes
    > the iris closes down so the picture looks too dark - it is survivable
    > with light and colourful pictures (even if it's not optimal) but with
    > Darker Pictures and Black and White pictures it's a problem.
    > I can use Adobe Bridge instead, but I am disappointed that Microsoft
    > haven't fixed this problem following Vista.
    > If you want to test the theory, just try looking at a darker picture
    > on a dark background, then look at it in photo viewer, you will see
    > what I mean.
    >
    > Posted by:
    > Bryan Wallbridge


    I did see that. But, that is one specific case, viewing picture, and I
    agree with it as well. That is my **opinion** as well, for viewing
    pictures.

    You though, had indicated that you do everything with a black background,
    and that everyone should do everything with a black background or else
    they will need glasses by age 40. Or that using a white background will
    cause brain cancer.
     
  13. Frank

    Frank Guest

    Re: BAD APPLICATION BACJGROUND COLOR CHOICES!!! NO CUSTOMIZATION,DISREGARD OF WIN SYSTEMWIDE SETTINGS!!

    Mark Levitski wrote:
    > So you defy Microsoft themselves?
    > They subliminally touted it as a fix for Vista.

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

    Got a link to an official statement by Microsoft stating that as fact?
    Well...?
     
  14. I said "subliminally".
    It's too self-damaging to make a statement declaring a new product as a fix
    for previous.

    But in technical circles MS officials unofficially )yes, it sounds as an
    oxymoron) admitted they count on Win7 to alleviate Vista pain.

    I like the name Windows7 - it's nostalgic. I started in Win3.11 when I was
    21 years old back in Brooklyn, NY
    I was known as a staunch "pro-Microsofter" praising all they did, and
    bashing DOS users who insisted on "never" switching to GUI or Windows.
    I just started learnign English but already attacked DOS'ers explaining to
    them Windows = progress.

    I was a bit wrong in one aspect, though. Now I see how keyboard is faster
    than a mouse.
    In WinXP I'd rarely move mouse given ability to navigate even in darkness
    with just a few keyboard arrow keys, anyways this is BORING.
    I didn't mean to get boring with this post.

    Frank,

    it's common knowledge that MS is releasing Win7 sooner than usual upgrade
    cycle is, due to Vista complains.
    Vista's strength is security, XP's strenght is productivity, maybe Win7 will
    combine both strong points.
    I am too lazy to experiement with Linux.
    I want Windows to work, chiefly I want CUSTOMIZATION.
    From zero to eyeballs, total customization - colors, shapes, I hate even
    round window corners in Vista, i am always switched to Classic mode.
    Did you notice how many professionals could care less for Aero tricks, and
    sitchk to Classic apeparance, even in WindowsXP for 9 year snow Microsoft is
    keeping this appearance as an option.
    Probably means something?
     
  15. I actually have a switch:
    Two color schemes:

    1. My-dark
    2. My-regular.

    I agree InternetExplorer may display most sites unacceptably when
    Accessibility is set to override wbpage designers & instead use Win
    system-wide setting I set, for example, to Black.
    Some websites though look gorgeous because their designer's taste is similar
    to ours, in plain English designer is using great contrast between fonts &
    background. So no need for o verriding that.
    So I agree Interent I usually leave alone and run with light background,
    with almost unchanged Vista colors.

    I jus tlike these to be black background:
    All Graphics/photos.
    CAD/Drafting, Engineering simulation/professional tools.
    Word processing
    Email

    These are my most frequent tasks, for all else I am like most people use
    white backgriound, .
    I am writing this very message on a beautiful Black background with
    light-silver fonts, and harddisk halted, quiet, nice.
    I really know how ot make computers ergonomic & healthy, and FAST.

    It's just once in a while comes along an application e.g. WinLive
    PhotoGallery that disrespects user's Windows-wide customization.
    Despite claims that some kind of "most recent build" is in fact adhering to
    system-wide settiungs, no it's not.
    My WLPG is dated by 3 days ago, pretty recent!! I just installed it and
    went straight to complaining because WinXP Picture & FAX viewer was NOT so
    obnoxiously white. Whoever designed WinXP apps had better brains than
    Vista's team.
    Now you might say, there're mor eimportant things in life, and if someone
    doesn't like a specific app, get another. Quit complaing.

    Here's my answer:
    People don't realize what I am complaining about - not about that
    application per se.
    I am trying to STOP a wider trend in WinLive applications recently coming to
    market which disrespect users. They insist on their own appearance, shapes,
    buttons, and what realy annoys - COLORS.
    If I don't complain, besides WLPG there'll be 100 other softwares with
    similar wild trends.
    All applications must have this option :

    USE WINDOWS COLORS.

    Is that difficult? Whether you like white or bron-yellow-dirt-bluish
    colors, everybody is happy.
    But WLPG and other WinLive applications fail to include such basic
    customization.

    Or maybe I am accustomed to $25-40,000 design/CAD software where everything
    is done properly?
    I know Windows is cheap. per unit, But market is enormous. 100 bucks is
    cheap but they sell it in millions, hundreds of millions!

    This is why they dont care. They might leave this damn WLPG with white
    background, which means i am off to get a 3d party application instead.

    I actually like MS Office 2007 Picture Manager, even if it's as
    uncustomizable as WLPG i already have it, why bother with another image
    viewer... more software, more bloatness and Filesystem/disk resources
    waste., not to mention complexity always decreases reliability.
    If they can't add a simple button for colors, this little fact is enough to
    uninstall.

    I sound funny?
    Yes I am very particulate, I eat certain food, wear certain clothes and want
    my software to lok certain way. I never conform because "it can't be done",
    anything can be done.
    In this case uninstall, and get a 3d party viewer. Or hack WindowsXP Pic &
    FAX viewer, which I have a vague idea how (need to patch registry, etc).
     
  16. I don't claim it WILL cause brain cancer.
    What I claim is statistically increasing your chances of brain cancer.

    Cellphones, microwave ovens, RF antenna towers, highvoltage transmission
    lines, etc. ALONE don't kill as an inevitable consequence.
    What you eatm breath, do and your genetics are mor eimportant.

    I said they increase chances. if I can reduce chances of a fatal desease,
    why not do it?
    For example why not cut cellphone usage and not stare into bright computer
    displays for too long?
    It's the CUMULATIVE effect of these factors that increases our chance of
    some bad news in later life.

    That you're not dead yet despite living near highvoltage lines does not
    idnicate anything substantial.
    Demographics operates in statistcial terms, in thousands at least. You;re
    single case of lving at a fare distance from those lines, andvoltage not too
    high, is not a reason to relax.
    Our ancestors were dying from infections, violence/animals/wars.
    We die from cancer, heart and mental issues are becoming rampant down to
    kindergarten.

    What does i ttell you?
    Technocratic civilization added riskj factors, and spendign time with
    computers i sone of them
    I maintain my eye health religiously, and shoot me but writing this message
    on a bright white background in bright lit room would be a headache.
    Instead I got somethign nice here... you can't see.
    And any application that refuses me to customize it, is something I use as
    quickly as possible, and shut down to get it off display.
     
  17. What was th evoltage of those Transmission lines?
    In tens of Kilovolt range? That would not create enough EM field to disturb
    you much.
    I dare you live under a Million volt line, which usually makes buzzing sound
    as it vibrates due to enormous power traveling accors sit.

    And live like that for a decade, will see how yo would feel. House values
    under such Transmission lines have decsreaed because people get educated and
    disocver what it does yo your health.

    And from a practical perspective, bad weather could down one of those
    megavolt lines, I'd be scared to death.
    I've been sacred to death by even a sight of highrise highvoltage line, and
    I am an EE Electrical engineer, it's strange.

    I am tired of computers this weekend, so thi sis the last post. Praise the
    Lord, I am done for the week.
     
  18. DanS

    DanS Guest

    "Mark Levitski" <SS@nyc.rr.com> wrote in
    news:efjEn6w5JHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:

    > I said "subliminally".
    > It's too self-damaging to make a statement declaring a new product as
    > a fix for previous.
    >
    > But in technical circles MS officials unofficially )yes, it sounds as
    > an oxymoron) admitted they count on Win7 to alleviate Vista pain.
    >
    > I like the name Windows7 - it's nostalgic. I started in Win3.11 when
    > I was 21 years old back in Brooklyn, NY
    > I was known as a staunch "pro-Microsofter" praising all they did, and
    > bashing DOS users who insisted on "never" switching to GUI or Windows.
    > I just started learnign English but already attacked DOS'ers
    > explaining to them Windows = progress.


    Got anything else to make up ????

    Let's see.........Win 3.11 when you 'started' with computers.

    And in your first post here....

    "I've been doing computers for @least 20 years, my permanent colorscheme
    is dark or totally Black, black background (desktop/app. window/etc),
    etc. I am a degreed (MSEE) engineer so not stupid,"

    And......

    "Been doing it long enough and my 28-year old eyes are in perfect shape
    despite so much compyters, that most Developers get glasses by 40!"

    Do the math. It doesn't add up.

    > I was a bit wrong in one aspect, though. Now I see how keyboard is
    > faster than a mouse.
    > In WinXP I'd rarely move mouse given ability to navigate even in
    > darkness with just a few keyboard arrow keys, anyways this is BORING.
    > I didn't mean to get boring with this post.
    >
    > Frank,
    >
    > it's common knowledge that MS is releasing Win7 sooner than usual
    > upgrade cycle is, due to Vista complains.


    Not sooner.

    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/WinHistoryProGraphic.mspx

    Vista was in Jan 2007, which was the longest time between releases. Every
    other one was 2 to 3 years.

    > Vista's strength is security, XP's strenght is productivity, maybe
    > Win7 will combine both strong points.
    > I am too lazy to experiement with Linux.


    Or spell check.

    > I want Windows to work, chiefly I want CUSTOMIZATION.
    > From zero to eyeballs, total customization - colors, shapes, I hate
    > even round window corners in Vista, i am always switched to Classic
    > mode. Did you notice how many professionals could care less for Aero
    > tricks, and sitchk to Classic apeparance, even in WindowsXP for 9 year
    > snow Microsoft is keeping this appearance as an option.
    > Probably means something?


    Yes, it means that there are a *lot* of boring people out there.
     
  19. That only referred to WINDOWS.
    Before coming to America, we did CP/M - an 8-bit operating system killed by
    DOS. CP/M's ceator comitted suicide having witnessed Bill gates getting
    superrich and overtaking his 8-bit system with what was perceieved in those
    days "an impossibly complex 16-bit" OS.
    I programmed in Assembler. I tell you I've been around things since ttenage
    years, and at age 8 or 9 i even fixed a boat when my father decided to take
    a trip into Black Sea in russian south. Poeple still remember that, i was
    just 8 years old.

    I tell you WindowsVista i smeant for games and not business or technical
    people.
    I can chew your ears off with tehcnical facts and infobits.

    So i was around computers sicne at least 20 years ago, i am 37 now.
     
  20. That was a TYPO. NOT 28 year old, but 38 year old, well 37 aand turning 38
    in a few weeks.

    Ok hope that clarifies a conflict, I noticed it already, 28 was a typo. 2
    and 3 are next to each othe ron the keyboard and i was on a mobile device in
    some dark cafe, with people smoking around, and tiny keyboard, who cares
    about typos. I was lucky to type anythign at all.
     

Share This Page