Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (
More info?)
I, along with you, hope for better things from Microsoft also. But I am
realistic enough to know that they will NOT be problem free.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Quote from: George Ankner
"If you knew as much as you thought you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!"
"Phil.T" <PhilT@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news
D9E636F-0F43-4763-B868-276149E8A2B2@microsoft.com...
> Richard....it is not a pre-requisite for a Windows user that in the long
> term
> you must build up sufficient technical prowess via a technical on-line
> forum
> to enable you to use your product.......is it? My criticism of XP was
> that
> in the first place the version of XP launched onto the retail market could
> have been de-bugged far better than it actually was. If I had had wanted
> to
> get involved with a Beta version of a new operating system I wouldn't have
> expected to pay the full retail price whilst anticipating nearly 12 months
> of
> frustration waiting for a necessary service pack to sort out the glitches.
> Security vulnerabilites develop as a result of malicious users exploiting
> situations which the Windows development team had failed to protect in the
> first place. That as a statement is not an over simplification of the
> truth.
> The vast majority of Windows users are not "experts" and a well developed
> system, creating billions of dollars for it's makers, should never have
> required the ongoing attention it has received. Windows XP is an OK
> operating system.....nothing more. I hope for better things from Microsoft
> in
> the near future.....and I'm not talking about updates !!
>
> "Richard Urban" wrote:
>
>> Think! What has changed on the internet since 1998 and 2005. Do you
>> really
>> think that Win98 had the same magnitude of hurtful hits that Windows XP
>> is
>> receiving. All you had were virus's to contend with and the AV programs
>> took
>> care of them.
>>
>> Go back to Win98. I can guarantee you won't be bothered with any patches
>> or
>> updates from now on.
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Richard Urban
>>
>> Quote from: George Ankner
>> "If you knew as much as you thought you know,
>> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!"
>>
>> "GeoffB in London" <GeoffBinLondon@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
>> message news:C5ADDD2D-9364-4A92-8C15-A0B6E4DECE13@microsoft.com...
>> >I agree with Phil! Having used WIN98 for years without having too much
>> > hassle with updates, I'm amazed every second Tuesday of the month. I
>> > know
>> > lots of XP users who have had major problems with updates. I accept
>> > the
>> > need
>> > for increased security but many of these updates are frankly
>> > unnecessary.
>> >
>> > "Richard Urban" wrote:
>> >
>> >> There isn't a quality program in existence that doesn't get updated to
>> >> remedy problems. Many have actually been discontinued because the
>> >> problems
>> >> could not be fixed without a complete rewrite.
>> >>
>> >> Then you have the programs that broke because of SP2. The authors had
>> >> over a
>> >> year to bring "their" program into compliance with the new Window
>> >> standards,
>> >> yet many failed to do so. Many others just said "we are not going to".
>> >> A
>> >> complete rewrite may have been necessary and they didn't want to do
>> >> it.
>> >>
>> >> There were other companies in the above category who just introduced a
>> >> "new"
>> >> (patched?) program a few months later and upgraded it's version by a
>> >> complete increment instead of a dot something upgrade. This way they
>> >> could
>> >> charge you to buy the NEW version.
>> >>
>> >> Quite a few end users had to retire some of their favorite programs
>> >> because
>> >> of this. Fortunately, I was not one of them (-:
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Richard Urban
>> >>
>> >> Quote from: George Ankner
>> >> "If you knew as much as you thought you know,
>> >> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!"
>> >>
>> >> "Phil.T" <PhilT@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:4CEE6C4A-041B-4FC4-91E2-1910A4F988BB@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Hell no ! But thank goodness drugs companies don't take the same
>> >> > stance
>> >> > on
>> >> > field trials within the public domain. I know.....it's another poor
>> >> > similarity, but development costs of any new software, especially a
>> >> > new
>> >> > world-wide systems platform, are enormous. As a result Microsoft are
>> >> > under
>> >> > financial pressure to launch that new software as quickly as
>> >> > possible
>> >> > onto
>> >> > the retail market. I just feel that on occassions the marketing boys
>> >> > have
>> >> > a
>> >> > bigger say on the launch date than the development department. Maybe
>> >> > if
>> >> > the
>> >> > development guys had won the argument then updates could be
>> >> > minimised
>> >> > and
>> >> > the
>> >> > product I paid full retail price for would have been debugged a
>> >> > little
>> >> > bit
>> >> > more prior to its launch. Anyway, better stop here before Bill Gates
>> >> > knocks
>> >> > me off his Christmas card list. It's a good product and I look
>> >> > forward
>> >> > with
>> >> > anticipation to Long Horn......as long as I'm not paying for field
>> >> > trials.
>> >> > If
>> >> > my Jeep gets a manufacturer's recall within the next 3 months I'll
>> >> > give
>> >> > you a
>> >> > shout ! Cheers.......Phil
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bob I" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Would you rather they didn't fix them?!?!? ;-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Phil.T wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > I agree Bob but 157 ! Got to go....busy fitting traction
>> >> >> > control
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > stick-shift to my laptop at the moment. Thanks for the
>> >> >> > response...appreciated.
>> >> >> > Driveeeeeeeeee...I mean surf safely!
>> >> >> > Phil
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Bob I" wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>Combination of discovered incompatibilities found in widespread
>> >> >> >>use(bugs
>> >> >> >>not found earlier), and system changes made to prevent resource
>> >> >> >>redirection(security). A car the other hand is remarkable simple
>> >> >> >>compared to software. Of course Windows isn't going to require 15
>> >> >> >>gals
>> >> >> >>of fuel that will combust in a crash either! So perhaps a really
>> >> >> >>comparison no?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>Phil.T wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>>Since I switched to XP Pro in Jan 2003 my computer has received
>> >> >> >>>and
>> >> >> >>>installed
>> >> >> >>>a total of 157 different updates courtesy of Microsoft. As much
>> >> >> >>>as
>> >> >> >>>I
>> >> >> >>>enjoy
>> >> >> >>>the benefits of XP over earlier operating systems I do ask
>> >> >> >>>myself
>> >> >> >>>whether 157
>> >> >> >>>updates is the result of ongoing development of the system or
>> >> >> >>>rather
>> >> >> >>>the
>> >> >> >>>result of the lack of it prior to XP's launch in 2002. If my pc
>> >> >> >>>had
>> >> >> >>>actually
>> >> >> >>>been my car I wonder how plausible ownership would have been
>> >> >> >>>over a
>> >> >> >>>3
>> >> >> >>>year
>> >> >> >>>period with 157 recalls? Hmm...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram