OT: Re:

"mayayana" <mayaXXyana1a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:uHlHHqpHIHA.4272
@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:


I lurk. I post. Sometimes it's fun, sometimes it's entertaining,
sometimes downright stupidity

I came across that group a few weeks ago and I've
found it very interesting. Aside from the arguments,
it's interesting to see how Vista is panning out. I'm
surprised by how often people seem to be having
trouble with basic things, like "I can't download." or
"I can't delete a file."

Yes, basic issues. Many complaining about UAC....several UAC prompts to
simply delete a shortcut icon from the desktop.

A giant problem with network file transfers, and calculation of
'Remaining time', and other very basic functions.

I'm also surprised by how often the advice is "Did you
try a System Restore?" That got me to wondering...
Are all the System Restore recommendations
simply glibness on the part of people who don't have an
answer, or are more people increasingly storing all data
files online, or on a network storage box, so that their
PC is really just the System and Program Files folders?

System Restore !!!! Ha !!!! Like that ever works. OK, it may works
sometimes. But, for all intensive purposes, that utility should not be
_necessary_.

System Restore is recommended when the experts have no clue as to what
the issue is. Most system restore recommendation's are offered by the
MVP's none-the-less.

I suppose in the latter case a weekly System Restore
might make sense.

I don't see it as so. Wait, there is a reason for it. When Redmond
releases patches on Automatic Updates that hose your system, as most
users most users foolishly leave automatic updates on set to
automatically d/l and install.

But it's a sad commentary on the state
of Windows: A constant dripfeed of patches has gradually
become regarded as normal on XP. Now it appears that
a regular schedule of System Restore is becoming the norm
on Vista.

Yes, that is the norm. I've refused to downgrade to Vista until I 'have'
to. I have support family members and friends, and so far, only one is
using Vista, thank god.

Let's just hope that Windows7 will be better....much better.

http://www.windows7.cc/

The Windows OS has just gotten tooooo large and complex. Simple as that.

Why ? I don't know. Maybe because of the advances in speed of hardware
and ever dropping HW costs.

Maybe all of the bloat is necessary to fix all of the MS mistakes from
the past that have been carried thru with each version of Windows.

There's one person in m.p.w.v.g that has a standard reply when asked
about the number of processes running. A poster will ask, 'is 56 running
processes too much ?' The've got 56 processes running right after a clean
boot. Now his standard response is...'It doesn't matter how many are
running, it depends on what they are'.

Not IMO, this XP box has 22 running processes directly after boot time.
Still a bit too much for my taste, but what can you do. The way I look at
it is, with 56 processes vs 22 processes, the chances of some type of s/w
malfunction causing system instability and crashing is increased by a
thousand times, as there are many more processes going thru memory
allocation, hd accessing, context-switching, etc., and each have to be
able to interact with each other on some level.

There is really no reason why there should be much of a difference (bloat
wise) between 98 and Vista. Sure, there's all the built-in software that
MS added to drive third-party vendors out of the business......er, uh,
all the built in 'features' I mean. But, even those are bloated and
resource-pigs compared to other developers s/w that does the same thing.
Those 'features' _should_ also be able to be installed or _completely_
uninstalled at will by the user.

Think of it this way, install 98 on modern hardware, spend $50 on the
Stardock suite, and you have a _thousand_ times the WoW and UI
customizability as Vista, PLUS the thing is screaming fast, since 98 has
a footprint magnitude's smaller than Vista.

(I know that the above is not feasible. Many companies have stopped
developing driver's and software that runs on 9x.)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Total Data Loss + System Recovery Error on Vista X64
    ... We both know that the Core2Quad system that you have elected to load Vista X64 onto isn't an X86 system since you exercised your option to put a Vista ... In Windows 7, you won't need the DVD to use these repair options, at long ... and system restore from F8's options don't work so I ... One of the safe modes is Safe Mode with Command, so I'm going to supply you ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.installation_setup)
  • Re: Re-System Restore Available 4 Places Win7 and System 32 Vista SP1 and SP2
    ... When using the option of right clicking on Computer in the start menu there is no backup option in Vista SP2. ... I can backup using Complete PC Backup etc or I can 'repair windows using system restore and create a system restore point' but no option to create a startup repair disk. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: wuauclt.exe corrupted
    ... > How to configure and use Automatic Updates in Windows XP: ... This means that it is using 99% of my computer resources. ... I have also disabled my updates and done a system restore ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: Re-System Restore Available 4 Places Win7 and System 32 Vista SP1 and SP2
    ... Windows XP Associate Expert ... I can backup using Complete PC Backup etc or I can 'repair windows using system restore and create a system restore point' but no option to create a startup repair disk. ... None of the people who had expensive boxes knew what System 32 was, but all of them told me they hoped there was a way to fix their Vista if they had a blue screen and couldn't boot. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: Re-System Restore Available 4 Places Win7 and System 32 Vista SP1 and SP2
    ... I can backup using Complete PC Backup etc or I can 'repair windows using system restore and create a system restore point' but no option to create a startup repair disk. ... None of the people who had expensive boxes knew what System 32 was, but all of them told me they hoped there was a way to fix their Vista if they had a blue screen and couldn't boot. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)