Should Microsoft Protect Our Investment In Windows Software?

ulTRAX · Nov 16, 2007

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

> Why did you move to Windows vista?
> You could have stayed with windows XP if that worked for you.

That's an easy one: my old XP PC's hard drive fried. The PC was to old to
justify buying another IDE drive. As for XP... I have an installation disk so
going back is still an option. I had to be back online ASAP so I didn't have
much time to research much beyond PC specs and price. I was reduced to going
to the library to get on line and most of that time was trying to find out if
I could repair my old PC. In the end I got a really great price on a PC...
$150 cheaper than the Staples in the next town I'd just visited, so I grabbed
it.

Charlie Tame · Nov 16, 2007

Frank wrote:
> ulTRAX wrote:
> 
>>
>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>
>>
>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>> own failings.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>
>
> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
> Frank

Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some frustrated
user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was working but
frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?

norm · Nov 16, 2007

Charlie Tame wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>>> own failings.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>
>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>> Frank
>
>
> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some frustrated
> user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was working but
> frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?
Do you really think that frank cares about anything other than his
opportunity for throwing a tantrum?
--
norm

Jupiter Jones [MVP] · Nov 16, 2007

Then you may have the best of both.
Go back to windows XP.
When/if you decide to move to Windows Vista you already have the OEM
media that came with this new computer.
If not find out what you need to to to get or make the media.
You have options and control and that is always good.

Personally, I like Windows Vista as it works well on two older
computers of mine, but it is not for everyone, similar as Windows XP
was not for everyone at its release 6 years ago..
Windows XP will probably be supported for several more years so if
windows XP works for you, stay with what works.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"ulTRAX" <ulTRAX@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news65FDA41-22FA-471A-AAEC-040D272971BA@microsoft.com...
> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:
>
>> Why did you move to Windows vista?
>> You could have stayed with windows XP if that worked for you.
>
> That's an easy one: my old XP PC's hard drive fried. The PC was to
> old to
> justify buying another IDE drive. As for XP... I have an
> installation disk so
> going back is still an option. I had to be back online ASAP so I
> didn't have
> much time to research much beyond PC specs and price. I was reduced
> to going
> to the library to get on line and most of that time was trying to
> find out if
> I could repair my old PC. In the end I got a really great price on a
> PC...
> $150 cheaper than the Staples in the next town I'd just visited, so
> I grabbed
> it.

Charlie Tame · Nov 16, 2007

norm wrote:
> Charlie Tame wrote:
>> Frank wrote:
>>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>>>> own failings.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>>
>>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>>> Frank
>>
>>
>> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some
>> frustrated user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was
>> working but frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?
> Do you really think that frank cares about anything other than his
> opportunity for throwing a tantrum?

Have to wait and see

Charlie Tame · Nov 16, 2007

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Then you may have the best of both.
> Go back to windows XP.
> When/if you decide to move to Windows Vista you already have the OEM
> media that came with this new computer.
> If not find out what you need to to to get or make the media.
> You have options and control and that is always good.
>
> Personally, I like Windows Vista as it works well on two older computers
> of mine, but it is not for everyone, similar as Windows XP was not for
> everyone at its release 6 years ago..
> Windows XP will probably be supported for several more years so if
> windows XP works for you, stay with what works.
> 

Actually JJ it might be a good idea to try the MS virtual machine and
install XP as guest if the original XP CD is available with key...

The poster formerly known as 'Th · Nov 16, 2007

Charlie Tame wrote:
> The poster formely known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
> wrote:
>> Charlie Tame wrote:
>>> The poster formely known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy' 
> 
>>> And my findings were the same. True I have a limited number of
>>> machines to test and only 2 "Might" have been capable. Both said yes,
>>> both failed during install, 2/2 wrong.
>>
>> I at least had successful installs (one on second partition of my
>> desktop machine, one in a virtual machine). Sounds like I got lucky.
>
>
> It has been faultless on VirtualBox but of course the GFX are down.

I had to work past a few issues with my vmware server install, but the
experience could have been much worse.

>
> 
>>> I then took 3 brand new machines, not a single one installed without
>>> problems and some new hardware had to be replaced. Go figure. Had any
>>> of these been my "Work" machine I'd have been well inconvenienced.
>>>
>>> Then when I fitted the new hardware, because I'd done what most
>>> people would do and allowed the default "Activate as soon as
>>> installed" option, I had to reactivate. Sorry but that default option
>>> is not "On" by accident, it is "On" by default so you don't notice it
>>> and MS get to evaluate your machine before you do 
>>
>> I'm surprised. I have 2 licenses for Vista Business retail and
>> neither of them activated as soon as installed. I never noticed an
>> option for it during the install (if there even is one), I just knew I
>> wasn't going to activate until everything is working.
>
>
> My MSDN copy is supposedly the same as retail. There is a checkmark
> right at the start of the install that askes "Shall we activate as soon
> as we have a connection" or something to that effect. It is very easy to
> miss and quite honestly even easier the first time around if you are a
> bit anxious to get the job underway, as many people might be.

It could be specific to the MSDN license. If I recall properly, MSDN
are slightly different than retail in the manner that you are supposed
to get more reactivations with less trouble because they are for testing
and not for production use.

>
> 
>>> I mean just having one spare machine is an advantage a lot of people
>>> won't have, an outage is a big deal to many people, didn't bother me
>>> much at all but that's not the point, the point is that from most
>>> ordinary users' point of view is the creek without a paddle. It is
>>> not fair to berate them for lack of knowledge when it is not their
>>> specialty, nor is it fair to berate them for not using tools when the
>>> darned tools don't work.
>>>
>>
>> Esp. when said tools are buggy!
>> 
>
>
> Well common sense dictates that a 6 year old machine is likely to fail,
> but the Advisor said okay so who am I (or common sense) to argue. You
> know I get the SW "free" so I believe there is an element of "Duty" to
> at least give it some honest review - I tend to approach this as a
> normal user (is there such a thing) in a domestic situation with no
> great reserve in terms of cash or equipment. A sort of "How would I feel
> if" scenario.
>
> Results were "Not happy" in some cases, to say the least. I don't think
> it fair to deny Microsoft this important feedback.
> 

I see your point. The way I see it, the "important feedback" is all
around in articles, forums, newsgroups, etc. If MS cares about the
feedback, they would do well to listen. Even better to tell them
directly of experiences with their product(s).

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -
Submit your nomination at the link below:

View nominations already submitted:

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett

Jupiter Jones [MVP] · Nov 16, 2007

Charlie;
Yes, another option, possibly better.
My point was he got a good price and has the option of using either
Windows XP or Windows Vista or a combination as you suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:uoA5TwNKIHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Actually JJ it might be a good idea to try the MS virtual machine
> and install XP as guest if the original XP CD is available with
> key...

Jupiter Jones [MVP] · Nov 16, 2007

Charlie;
"Shall we activate as soon as we have a connection"
I am also unsure of the exact wording.
The question about activating after installation is in the retail
versions as well.
I have seen it a few times with Retail Windows Vista installations.
That is not unique to MSDN.
It can be easy to miss so it is possible for Windows vista to
automatically Activate without the user knowing why.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:%23jTOGHMKIHA.4808@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The poster formely known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
> DiBoy' wrote:
>> Charlie Tame wrote:
>>> The poster formely known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
>>> DiBoy'
>
>>> And my findings were the same. True I have a limited number of
>>> machines to test and only 2 "Might" have been capable. Both said
>>> yes, both failed during install, 2/2 wrong.
>>
>> I at least had successful installs (one on second partition of my
>> desktop machine, one in a virtual machine). Sounds like I got
>> lucky.
>
>
> It has been faultless on VirtualBox but of course the GFX are down.
>
>
>>> I then took 3 brand new machines, not a single one installed
>>> without problems and some new hardware had to be replaced. Go
>>> figure. Had any of these been my "Work" machine I'd have been well
>>> inconvenienced.
>>>
>>> Then when I fitted the new hardware, because I'd done what most
>>> people would do and allowed the default "Activate as soon as
>>> installed" option, I had to reactivate. Sorry but that default
>>> option is not "On" by accident, it is "On" by default so you don't
>>> notice it and MS get to evaluate your machine before you do 
>>
>> I'm surprised. I have 2 licenses for Vista Business retail and
>> neither of them activated as soon as installed. I never noticed an
>> option for it during the install (if there even is one), I just
>> knew I wasn't going to activate until everything is working.
>
>
> My MSDN copy is supposedly the same as retail. There is a checkmark
> right at the start of the install that askes "Shall we activate as
> soon as we have a connection" or something to that effect. It is
> very easy to miss and quite honestly even easier the first time
> around if you are a bit anxious to get the job underway, as many
> people might be.
>
>
>>> I mean just having one spare machine is an advantage a lot of
>>> people won't have, an outage is a big deal to many people, didn't
>>> bother me much at all but that's not the point, the point is that
>>> from most ordinary users' point of view is the creek without a
>>> paddle. It is not fair to berate them for lack of knowledge when
>>> it is not their specialty, nor is it fair to berate them for not
>>> using tools when the darned tools don't work.
>>>
>>
>> Esp. when said tools are buggy!
>> 
>
>
> Well common sense dictates that a 6 year old machine is likely to
> fail, but the Advisor said okay so who am I (or common sense) to
> argue. You know I get the SW "free" so I believe there is an element
> of "Duty" to at least give it some honest review - I tend to
> approach this as a normal user (is there such a thing) in a domestic
> situation with no great reserve in terms of cash or equipment. A
> sort of "How would I feel if" scenario.
>
> Results were "Not happy" in some cases, to say the least. I don't
> think it fair to deny Microsoft this important feedback.
>

Frank · Nov 17, 2007

Charlie Tame wrote:
> Frank wrote:
> 
>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>>> own failings.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>
>>
>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>> Frank
>
>
>
> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some frustrated
> user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was working but
> frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?

Maybe charlie you should go back and read the op's original post about
incompatibility where he specifically mentioned a few apps that he said
were not compatible. I posted that he needed to install one (WS_FTP Pro)
using compatibility mode and one other Nero 8, installed normally and
was working just fine. I'm currently using both apps on at least 4 boxes
with Vista Ultimate installed (X32 on 3 and 1 X64). It seems to me that
he really isn't interested in actually getting the apps installed but is
more interested in picking a fight with MS because they've actually had
the balls to change one of their OS's. If you follow his successive
postings you'd have to be brain dead not to get the real intent of
postings. Obviously, I'm not the only one who got the same idea about
his postings. Maybe you're one of the ones who didn't, but seeing as how
I'm not the only one who started to question his real intentions I
certainly don't feel bad about nailing his ass to the wall b=about being
nothing more than a troll.
Ok?
Frank

Frank · Nov 17, 2007

norm wrote:

> Charlie Tame wrote:
> 
>> Frank wrote:
>>
>>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>>>> own failings.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>>
>>>
>>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>>> Frank
>>
>>
>>
>> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some
>> frustrated user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was
>> working but frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?
>
> Do you really think that frank cares about anything other than his
> opportunity for throwing a tantrum?

Fukk you norm! Did you actually tell or advise the op on how to install
the apps in question? I did cause I actually use them.
So please drop your stupid holier-than-thou act. It's quite transparent
and very self demeaning!
As*hole!
Frank

Charlie Tame · Nov 17, 2007

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Charlie;
> "Shall we activate as soon as we have a connection"
> I am also unsure of the exact wording.
> The question about activating after installation is in the retail
> versions as well.
> I have seen it a few times with Retail Windows Vista installations.
> That is not unique to MSDN.
> It can be easy to miss so it is possible for Windows vista to
> automatically Activate without the user knowing why.
> 

Thanks, it is not easy to tell if that is a special for MSDN because the
first screens do look a bit "Messy" compared to the rather more elegant
XP install.

The thing is if you are installing without much experience of installing
you probably think "Okay, this will save a bit of time and everything is
legit etc".

If something then goes bad during the period just after install, driver
problems, update problems or some incompatible something has to be
removed or replaced then you are already "Inventoried" for the
Validation / WGA or whatever it is that does what

Example I installed with a PCI wireless card but the driver didn't work
so I put in another card. That didn't work either so I messed with
drivers and then ended up installing another card. Then had to reactivate.

Now, it did this via the internet but I cannot tell if this actually
reviewed the level of changes and decided to okay them or whether it
simply used another of my ten test licenses... I have no idea how many I
started with or have left.

What this means is that as an ordinary user with only one license I
"Could" have been forced to phone and or been disabled for a time.

For this reason I think it would have made more sense to default to
giving the user a simple reminder such as you now have 30 days. Seems to
me MS asked for a lot of extra work from all the people who get faulty
installs due to unexpected problems.

I could add more but will leave it there for the moment

norm · Nov 17, 2007

Frank wrote:
> norm wrote:
> 
>> Charlie Tame wrote:
>>
>>> Frank wrote:
>>>
>>>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for
>>>>>> their own failings.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>>>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some
>>> frustrated user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was
>>> working but frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?
>>
>> Do you really think that frank cares about anything other than his
>> opportunity for throwing a tantrum?
>
> Fukk you norm! Did you actually tell or advise the op on how to install
> the apps in question? I did cause I actually use them.
> So please drop your stupid holier-than-thou act. It's quite transparent
> and very self demeaning!
> As*hole!
> Frank
Poor baby.

--
norm

Frank · Nov 17, 2007

norm wrote:
> Frank wrote:
> 
>> norm wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Tame wrote:
>>>
>>>> Frank wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ulTRAX wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for
>>>>>>> their own failings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>>>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>>>>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>>>>> Frank
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some
>>>> frustrated user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was
>>>> working but frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you really think that frank cares about anything other than his
>>> opportunity for throwing a tantrum?
>>
>>
>> Fukk you norm! Did you actually tell or advise the op on how to
>> install the apps in question? I did cause I actually use them.
>> So please drop your stupid holier-than-thou act. It's quite
>> transparent and very self demeaning!
>> As*hole!
>> Frank
>
> Poor baby.
>

Not even close!
Frank

Richard Urban · Nov 17, 2007

The first time I installed Vista Ultimate Retail I allowed automatic
activation. Then I updated the system. A SATA update came in - which
invalidated my system after the reboot (became "Not Genuine").

So, I started again and this time I unchecked the box that allowed
"automatic update". I then downloaded all updates, rebooted as required, and
activated Vista.

Such a waste of time and **MY** resources.

--

Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:uI$7sWOKIHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
>> Charlie;
>> "Shall we activate as soon as we have a connection"
>> I am also unsure of the exact wording.
>> The question about activating after installation is in the retail
>> versions as well.
>> I have seen it a few times with Retail Windows Vista installations.
>> That is not unique to MSDN.
>> It can be easy to miss so it is possible for Windows vista to
>> automatically Activate without the user knowing why.
>>
>
>
> Thanks, it is not easy to tell if that is a special for MSDN because the
> first screens do look a bit "Messy" compared to the rather more elegant XP
> install.
>
> The thing is if you are installing without much experience of installing
> you probably think "Okay, this will save a bit of time and everything is
> legit etc".
>
> If something then goes bad during the period just after install, driver
> problems, update problems or some incompatible something has to be removed
> or replaced then you are already "Inventoried" for the Validation / WGA or
> whatever it is that does what
>
> Example I installed with a PCI wireless card but the driver didn't work so
> I put in another card. That didn't work either so I messed with drivers
> and then ended up installing another card. Then had to reactivate.
>
> Now, it did this via the internet but I cannot tell if this actually
> reviewed the level of changes and decided to okay them or whether it
> simply used another of my ten test licenses... I have no idea how many I
> started with or have left.
>
> What this means is that as an ordinary user with only one license I
> "Could" have been forced to phone and or been disabled for a time.
>
> For this reason I think it would have made more sense to default to giving
> the user a simple reminder such as you now have 30 days. Seems to me MS
> asked for a lot of extra work from all the people who get faulty installs
> due to unexpected problems.
>
> I could add more but will leave it there for the moment

The poster formerly known as 'Th · Nov 17, 2007

Jupiter Jones [MVP] wrote:
> Charlie;
> "Shall we activate as soon as we have a connection"
> I am also unsure of the exact wording.
> The question about activating after installation is in the retail
> versions as well.
> I have seen it a few times with Retail Windows Vista installations.
> That is not unique to MSDN.
> It can be easy to miss so it is possible for Windows vista to
> automatically Activate without the user knowing why.
> 

Hmm. Interesting. I must have missed it.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -
Submit your nomination at the link below:

View nominations already submitted:

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett

Bruce Chambers · Nov 17, 2007

ulTRAX wrote:
>
> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
> 
>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their own
>> failings.
>
> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here hold
> everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>
> 

On the contrary, you've proven my point. (As nicely demonstrated by
your having to resort to name-calling, rather than rational arguments.)

I've simply pointed out that your dilemma is entirely self-inflicted,
and has *nothing* to do with Vista, per se. You've even admitted that
you didn't bother to even consider the two most important factors in
buying a new operating system: its suitability for your specific
intended purposes and the compatibility of your legacy applications with
the new OS. Instead, you considered only minimally relevant hardware
specs and the utterly irrelevant price of said hardware.

Now you want someone to blame for your mistake. Seek a scapegoat
elsewhere.

--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

Jupiter Jones [MVP] · Nov 17, 2007

Even though it is plainly there, it can be a little to easy to miss.
I wish it had been done so it was more obvious.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina
DiBoy'" <none@none.not> wrote in message news:fhn22p$oe4$1@aioe.org...
> Hmm. Interesting. I must have missed it.
>
> --
> Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -
> Submit your nomination at the link below:
>
>
> View nominations already submitted:
>
>
> "Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
> free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of
> the creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country.
> Consumer rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
> - Maura Corbett

NoStop · Nov 17, 2007

Charlie Tame wrote:

> Frank wrote:
>> ulTRAX wrote:
>> 
>>>
>>> "Bruce Chambers" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> No, I'd rather tell the "ingrates" to grow up and learn to accept
>>>> responsibility, rather than seeking to blame someone else for their
>>>> own failings.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for proving my point Bruce... that the Vista Jihadists here
>>> hold everyone else responsible for Vista's problems EXECPT Microsoft.
>>>
>>
>> You need to shove a copy of urbutto up your stupid ignorant arse.
>> It'll make your day you loser troll...lol!
>> Frank
>
>
> Just out of curiosity Frank if you owned a gun store and some frustrated
> user came in complaining that a gun you'd sold him was working but
> frustratingly inaccurate would you tell him to shove it?

Knowing how Frank is suffering from a brain injury reportedly gotten when he
last fought a war, I'd suspect that in the case you outlined, he'd probably
shoot his customer. Thank Gawd, Frank doesn't sell guns. Like the world
needs another well armed loonie around.

Cheers.

--
Remove Vista Activation Completely ...

Frank - seek help immediately! Visit ...

ulTRAX · Nov 18, 2007

Gee I thought I responded to your post. Do you REALLY think I would NOT want
to get these apps running? I can't find the post... maybe it was one of many
that that disappeared posting to MS's online board. One gets a notice that
the board is too busy and if one backs up to the last page, the post is goe.

Here's the bottom line. I wrote that I misstated that I had Nero 8 when I
really had 7. I now DO have 8 which IS Vista compatible.

As for WS_FTP... I tried your suggestion and it did NOT work. I got the same
errors as before.

So if you can't make a point without gross distortions... you haven't made a
point... have you Cupcake?

"Frank" wrote:

> Maybe charlie you should go back and read the op's original post about
> incompatibility where he specifically mentioned a few apps that he said
> were not compatible. I posted that he needed to install one (WS_FTP Pro)
> using compatibility mode and one other Nero 8, installed normally and
> was working just fine. I'm currently using both apps on at least 4 boxes
> with Vista Ultimate installed (X32 on 3 and 1 X64). It seems to me that
> he really isn't interested in actually getting the apps installed but is
> more interested in picking a fight with MS because they've actually had
> the balls to change one of their OS's.

Log in or Sign up

Should Microsoft Protect Our Investment In Windows Software?

ulTRAX Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

norm Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

The poster formerly known as 'Th Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Frank Guest

Frank Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

norm Guest

Frank Guest

Richard Urban Guest

The poster formerly known as 'Th Guest

Bruce Chambers Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

NoStop Guest

ulTRAX Guest

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Should Microsoft Protect Our Investment In Windows Software?

ulTRAX Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

norm Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

The poster formerly known as 'Th Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

Frank Guest

Frank Guest

Charlie Tame Guest

norm Guest

Frank Guest

Richard Urban Guest

The poster formerly known as 'Th Guest

Bruce Chambers Guest

Jupiter Jones [MVP] Guest

NoStop Guest

ulTRAX Guest

Share This Page

Useful Searches