Vista/w2k8/Aero etc

Well, I think I've reached a conclusion - in a telling timeframe.

I think the Aero theme is very well done. That glassy look, more so with the
Sidebar running, is superb - the best cosmetic job Microsoft have ever done
(imo)! And when I had the Sidebar running, I put gadgets on it giving top to
bottom - the countdown to the release of Server 2008, the Vista Orb clock, a
small BBC News 24 feed - continuous live BBC News playing on the desktop in
a tiny, little box - bloody marvellous! In the same category as having music
playing while you work or surf? Beneath that I had - lets see...oh yes, a
weather feed, set for this town and visually responding to the diurnal
cycle, a calendar - since T-ClockX which I've used almost since Win ME came
out, won't install in NT6.x - and I cannot abide seeing just the time down
there! And a Google search box on the bottom (had the Deskbar originally,
but there are issues with Google in 2K8 beta3. For one the toolbar crashes
IE7).

There was another Sidebar column but the second time I installed the toy,
the 'gadgets' rearranged at every boot, pushing most of the ones I wanted to
show by default, off of the desktop. How much this is a beta bug, I don't
know. There is one bug - apparently also in RTM Vista and waiting for SP1 to
hopefully fix - where the prog that pops up to tell you the one you tried to
execute has stopped responding, does this way too soon. I was quite
surprised actually when it got it right! I had come to expect that the prog
certainly had not stopped responding and all one had to do was wait a little
longer...that was SpywareBlaster, actually. Spybot S&D installs and
apparently works fine in (64-bit) Server 2008 beta3, Vista's brother - as
does Javacool's MRU-Blaster. But not SpywareBlaster. I'd say it's about
split down the middle which progs I've run in ME/XP for years, still work in
64-bit NT6.x. Not bad going?

Anyway, clearly I am taken by the 'Vista Desktop Experience' (which is an
extra available to Server 2008). Yet when one thinks of 1 GB of RAM as on
the low side, something isn't right. Priorities are askew, I think. I had
256MB RAM for quite a few years and have just moved up to 1G and I really
don't intend to swallow the line that it isn't enough anymore.

Joan in particular might be interested in this: yes, Aero is really pretty -
but it is still eye candy, and the appeal of it dies down as rapidly as all
other eye candy appeal does. That's why it's called 'eye candy' isn't it -
it's got no substance, long term it only really appeals to the shallow.
Well, that's what I believe anyway. I don't think you are shallow, Joan, so
if you liked Aero long term, I'd have to adjust my beliefs - but I don't
think I'll have to. Oh, you may be comfortable with it - but that isn't
enough. 'Comfortable with it' is 'faint praise' where Aero is concerned.

I used the Luna theme (XP default) for about a year - then reverted to how I
have it now - looking as much like 9x as it's possible to make it! That
isn't because I think 'conservative' is the way to go - it's because I think
the style of 9x is the most natural for comfortable, relaxed computer
operation. Back in the mid-90's they weren't looking to do things
differently, they were looking to do them efficiently. Hardly any time
before, it had all been command line computing (and limited mouse
operation - but that was building towards Windows, it was part of the
process that became 9x). Then there was Windows 1/2/3.x - these were
developers feeling their way. Jumping straight to 9x would be Creationism in
microcosm. Dosshell and the myriad of Office apps that used the mouse, in
DOS, and then pre-9x Windows, were the evolution of 9x. And then they got it
right, it all (more-or-less) came together. And after all it surely isn't
*that* difficult to figure out what the most ergonomic way to open a program
is, with a rectangle less than a foot-and-a-half to play with?

But with XP they were no longer trying to improve the user experience per
se, but to vary it enough that they could sell Windows again. And now
they've repeated that with Vista. But the interfaces are more and more
confusing, because controls are less where you'd expect them to be now -
because that's where they were, but now they've been moved!

This can easily be dismissed as just my pov - but it seems inescapably
logical to me - unless you suppose that either where to put things on the
screen is actually quite complicated (and it's taken them approaching a
decade and a half to figure out what personally I don't think should take
however many dozen dozen brilliant minds work for Microsoft, to figure
out) - or you might hypothesise that there is more than one (or two, or is
it three?) possible maximum ergonomic arrangements for the desktop and
window elements. Maybe I just feel a little more lost with each new
offering, because that's what happens when you get old, and I'm getting
there! Either way - as I already claimed the other day - they make all this
stuff for the kids - and we know what most of the kids are into nowadays! I
mean, we can be thankful it doesn't come with Crazy Frog sounds - but it
will! It will! It'll get there!

I wonder if New Labour banned firearms because they'd been given a preview
of what was to come?

I abandoned Luna several years ago, but to use Aero you have to use
effectively the same Start Menu - how much is similar to XP is more striking
than how much is different, I feel. Windows are another thing altogether. Of
course Vista/Server 2008, in the age of DOT Net are built like big web
sites. I don't like it - the new Windows Explorer, I mean. Oh, you get used
to it - but it's too much of the same. Making everything web is like losing
the seperation between work and home. I like working in Explorer as distinct
from the internet, in 9x, or here in XP. It is like getting back home,
putting on your slippers, relaxing. I don't think they understand that at
the global conglomerates. Like so many people seem unable to comprehend that
not everybody cares for 3D games, and sounds that belong in a video arcade.
Not everyone drinks so much coffee they have the shakes and not everyone is
so driven by the neurotic fear of failure that the only way they can relax
is by snorting a line or two and going to a club. We live in a world that
respects the workaholic as industrious and conscientious, when actually he's
half-mad and frequently breathtakingly shallow. But we let him design our
world (which is about as smart as putting the vain and power-obsessed in
high office).

I say 'he', 'him' etc. Women don't do a lot wrong. Or it pales into
insignificance once the men arrive! Most guys are idiots - but most women
cheer them on just the same! Anyhow it is notable that the proportion
responsible for the stupidity that oppresses us all, originates in the male
of the species. So if any girlies object to my use of the masculine here,
the answer is, I suspect, gender reassignment.

It doesn't matter if Windows Explorer looks like Internet Explorer
(*Windows* Internet Explorer!) to those who are happy to work 16 hours a
day - who tell themselves that work *is* play. They don't notice that all
day every day it's the same thing, relentless and uniform. There is no pro
to the reduction of variety - it's all con.

Windows XP is sufficiently like 9x as to be an improvement by virtue of
greater stability. In numerous ways the better stability of the NT kernel
can be appreciated. And you can make it look sufficiently like 9x that the
only real anti-XP argument is Product Activation/Validation (which makes
itself felt mostly on 56k dial-up. For most broadband users it would be
entirely painless if not for the requirement to click thrice where not so
long ago we only had to click once. The policy wanks at Microsoft presumably
think the anti-piracy message is best delivered by rubbing all of our noses
in it. It must be so, for I haven't shat on the carpet in at least three
years!).

In Windows Classic style - particularly with Win ME Plus's More Windows
theme, which enlarges the fonts - and in fact I uncheck all but the
Window/font size option, to get the XP Windows Classic theme, only more
readable - you have, I reckon, the pinnacle of the Windows Operating
System's look, to date. For as gorgeous as the full-blown Aero theme is,
what it needs in the long run is to be easy on the eye. I can't help
thinking that eventually - possibly sooner rather than later - I'll
reconfigure Server 2008 to Windows Classic. Then I'll really see the benefit
of 1G RAM, I guess! But if, after a couple of months you disable Aero, what
do you really need that much RAM for?

Hey, we can drink the tap water again - as long as it's boiled! I finally
tipped the 2 gallons in the bucket down the sink today (there was at least 1
dead insect in it).

So, most of us eventually end up using Vista having bought machines with,
say, 2G of RAM. And after a couple of months most of us turn off Aero - and
the Sidebar (the BBC News feed gets annoying quickly when all of a sudden
you need to concentrate!). So what do we have machines with 2G of RAM, for?
Well, the semi-conductor industry's rude health for one, I s'pose!
Presumably that produces as much deadly poison as it ever did? I wonder
who'll be the first to have their house flooded in the vicinity of the
landfill where they dump old PCBs and silicon chips? Probably anyone in the
UK. I'm sure the only reason they're starting to get exercised about
recycling is to make room for other nation's toxic waste!

Vista is a holiday. Somewhere different to go for a few weeks. Then it's
back to the familiar.

His name is Casey.


Shane

Very interesting write up Shane, I'm still holding off any opinion until
I've actually seen a Vista machine running so I can judge for myself.

As you say it may be that I don't need the eye candy but who knows what
I'll think of it until I actually use it. It will be some time though
before this happens so I'll just keep plodding along with my XP although
there is talk that Kelly's boyfriend will be buying her a laptop and that
will have Vista on it but I've told her that's not allowed she can't have
it before me g
Joan


Shane wrote:
snip

Joan in particular might be interested in this: yes, Aero is really
pretty - but it is still eye candy, and the appeal of it dies down as
rapidly as all other eye candy appeal does. That's why it's called
'eye candy' isn't it - it's got no substance, long term it only
really appeals to the shallow. Well, that's what I believe anyway. I
don't think you are shallow, Joan, so if you liked Aero long term,
I'd have to adjust my beliefs - but I don't think I'll have to. Oh,
you may be comfortable with it - but that isn't enough. 'Comfortable
with it' is 'faint praise' where Aero is concerned.

Joan Archer wrote:
Very interesting write up Shane, I'm still holding off any opinion until
I've actually seen a Vista machine running so I can judge for myself.

As you say it may be that I don't need the eye candy but who knows what
I'll think of it until I actually use it. It will be some time though
before this happens so I'll just keep plodding along with my XP although
there is talk that Kelly's boyfriend will be buying her a laptop and that
will have Vista on it but I've told her that's not allowed she can't have
it before me g
Joan


Compared to Ubuntu Beryl, Aero looks like it was done as an after
thought by someone in Redmond's mail room.

Here's a video to show you the difference:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

--
Alias

To email me, remove shoes

Joan Archer wrote:
Very interesting write up Shane, I'm still holding off any opinion
until I've actually seen a Vista machine running so I can judge for
myself.
As you say it may be that I don't need the eye candy but who knows
what I'll think of it until I actually use it. It will be some time

Yes, well, like I say, I have been really taken by it, whereas you have been
all along. That may mean you have noodles rather than brains vbg or it may
mean you saw something in it when I didn't, so I'll be interested in what
you do think. Which reminds me - I really *must* finish those noodles! g

And the peppers. Not sure what part of the anatomy to associate those with,
though!


though before this happens so I'll just keep plodding along with my
XP although there is talk that Kelly's boyfriend will be buying her a
laptop and that will have Vista on it but I've told her that's not
allowed she can't have it before me g


lol! That's the spirit!

Shane

Way too much 'eye candy' for this ol' f*rt..........I got a headache
watching the video. My wife's new laptop will be here soon, it has the
Vista Home Premium......we shall see. The biggest benefit I see with Vista
is that it will keep her off of my XP machine!!!
Heirloom, old and could be doomed


Compared to Ubuntu Beryl, Aero looks like it was done as an after thought
by someone in Redmond's mail room.

Here's a video to show you the difference:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

--
Alias

To email me, remove shoes

Heirloom wrote:
Way too much 'eye candy' for this ol' f*rt..........I got a headache
watching the video. My wife's new laptop will be here soon, it has the
Vista Home Premium......we shall see. The biggest benefit I see with Vista
is that it will keep her off of my XP machine!!!
Heirloom, old and could be doomed

That video also has the MAC eye candy. It's not so busy with just Beryl.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes


Compared to Ubuntu Beryl, Aero looks like it was done as an after thought
by someone in Redmond's mail room.

Here's a video to show you the difference:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

--
Alias

To email me, remove shoes

Alias wrote:
Joan Archer wrote:
Very interesting write up Shane, I'm still holding off any opinion
until I've actually seen a Vista machine running so I can judge for
myself. As you say it may be that I don't need the eye candy but who
knows
what I'll think of it until I actually use it. It will be some time
though before this happens so I'll just keep plodding along with my
XP although there is talk that Kelly's boyfriend will be buying her
a laptop and that will have Vista on it but I've told her that's not
allowed she can't have it before me g
Joan


Compared to Ubuntu Beryl, Aero looks like it was done as an after
thought by someone in Redmond's mail room.

Here's a video to show you the difference:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

I just put the cd in to see what you meant - since I've never noticed
anything as finished in Ubuntu - or any version of Linux, for that matter -
as the Windows interface. Some come close. But the difference between us is
not really that you think that Linux is superior to Windows and I vice
versa - it is that I freely admit this is just my opinion, while you keep
making these pronouncements as though they're indisputable Truth, not merely
your opinion, and the experience of others appears not to dent your absolute
conviction one whit - the implication of which is always going to be that
anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong.

Or is that what this 'Ubuntu' obsession is about? Were you a computer
operator/programmer/administrator back when it was a hermetic art and you
were revered for your arcane knowledge? Then along came Windows and now
you're 'just this guy'? So you keep rattling on about Ubuntu so when most
people find it difficult to use you'll be held in awe again?

Hey, you can scoff, but every street in every town in every country on Earth
has at least one guy who absolutely will not entertain the possibility that
he might be mistaken - and everybody else in the world knows it, knows that
'he always has to be right!'. The irony is that there will be those that
think I'm really talking about myself - and to them I say this is my own
sermon from the mount: the only way to avoid self-deception is to constantly
guard against it. The biggest self-deceivers are the ones who say they never
do it. Otherwise every last one of us does it, every day of our lives. And
it's about the last thing anyone wants to accept, therefore they keep doing
it.

"Here in my tittle-tattle little world
Of what I whittle down
To meet my preconceptions,
Thus to justify my fears,
In a box, as rare as spittle,
Just another Human skittle
Honing powers of deception
- So to dream another year"

And the one about the Pelican.

Linux trolls want everyone to be in awe of their ability to use the thing
when most give up after the first hour wasted trying to get the thing to do
something as basic as go online - especially if previously they spent an
entire day or two trying before realising that Linux simply doesn't support
their modem unless - as they found researching it on the net (in
Windows) they write their own driver!

It isn't too many years ago - though a year is a long time in computing, of
course - that I was set to write my own soft-modem driver. I could have done
it but the time it would have taken simply was not worth it...I had two or
three Windows installations up and running. Where is the gain in writing
your own driver for an OS who's developers failed to provide it themselves?
An alternative graphical user interface operating system is a nice idea, but
when you have to jump through hoops to get it to run - assuming you ever
can - the point is lost. And just how good is a system going to be once you
do get it set up, when you have to go through so much hassle to get there?

It's a rhetorical question.

But maybe it *would* be good! Only if the lack of perspective demonstrated
by those who recommend it unreservedly is reflected in it's inner workings,
then just forget about it. It begins to look like it's all about denial in
extremis.

Now I've binned the Ubuntu cd. I've had enough! On the old computer it
wouldn't just *run* and on the new computer it won't just *run*. On the old
computer it didn't support my trinitron-based monitor to the extent of
allowing me to configure it without going online first (see above) and
downloading a driver. Well, in that respect it was better than Windows for
Workgroups 3.11 - though I can finally run *that* with modern graphics in
Virtual PC (which Ubuntu hangs in). I am even used to Linux distros
supporting my monitor prior to Ubuntu. Ubuntu is the first OS since WFWG3.11
I'd run that I couldn't configure the video the way I wanted it in!

And now it wants to go online - only of course, it fails to! - to get
drivers for the reasonably recent (128MB) nVidia card! It *recognises* the
card - just doesn't have drivers for it. Tries to go online. Fails. Because
the modem hasn't been configured. I still haven't got a Linux distro to go
online with the current, common-as-muck and correctly identified (as ever,
but to no purpose) USB modems. No problem whatsoever in any recent version
of Windows! In fact, no problem in Server 2008 x64 beta 3 - what I've done
most of my running Aero in. So I can put a beta of a 64-bit Windows OS not
due for release until next year and not even at the RC stage and within 5
minutes the modem and the graphics card drivers are installed and it all
works very well. But this Ubuntu you keep rattling on about won't go online
and won't run 'Beryl' until it does, because it doesn't have the drivers for
a 128MB GeForce card (bought just a few months ago) like previously it
didn't have them for my Trinitron-baced CRT monitor (which still works well,
incidentally, but is sitting, boxed up and awaiting some use).

I don't care to spend the rest of the day trying to get Ubuntu to work. If
you think it is a serious rival for Windows, you need your head looking at.

So Alias, are you trying to lead people the way the stage magician does, to
accept your statement, or do you honestly believe you *can* make a judgement
on visual quality of either system, from such a low quality video? And I
don't recall what your Vista experience was, but preisely the same applies
to the question of whether you think - even if that video was crystal clear
and high res - that anyone can make such a judgement in a couple of minutes?
My 'report' is specifically about having come to like something that I
initially hated. It is about the necessity for time in order to make value
judgements. Presumably you didn't read my post, that Joan was responding to,
since if you're proposing that these interfaces can be definitively judged
in two minutes, you are clearly identifying with the 'shallow' users I
referred to.

Meanwhile, you can paint me as you like - you may have noticed I don't
particularly care what people think of me - but should we just write you off
as an Ubuntu obsessive? I mean, apart from the various update notifications,
most of your posts are indistinguishable from Ubuntu spam these days. Is it
your hobby horse or are you somehow connected with the project and
conveniently failing to mention it?

See, you can write both Mart and myself off as computer novices, if you
like, but believe you me, if neither of *us* can set Ubuntu up without
encountering severe difficulties, then the vast majority of the world's
personal computer users certainly cannot. I for one do not consider myself a
*guru* - but I do know so much more than the average user you'd need a
computer to calculate it! I'm sure all of us here have always considered you
intelligent enough to 'get' the implications of such a rather obvious fact.
You put the Windows cd in - one hour later you're surfing the net, writing
e-mails or work-related documents, listening to music etc. Put a Linux cd in
and, unless you're one of the lucky ones, an hour later you're pulling you
hair out. Are you going to ignore this inconvenient fact forever Alias?

Do you think that if it works for you, it works for everybody?

Or to you just want to goad me into an argument, because you can't get
enough of them? After all, it was guaranteed, wasn't it.


Shane

John might agree with you there g as for you finishing them whatever
turns you on, they're not my cup of tea at all g
Joan

Shane wrote:

That may mean you have noodles rather than
brains vbg or it may mean you saw something in it when I didn't, so
I'll be interested in what you do think. Which reminds me - I really
*must* finish those noodles! g

Shane wrote:
Alias wrote:
Joan Archer wrote:
Very interesting write up Shane, I'm still holding off any opinion
until I've actually seen a Vista machine running so I can judge for
myself. As you say it may be that I don't need the eye candy but who
knows
what I'll think of it until I actually use it. It will be some time
though before this happens so I'll just keep plodding along with my
XP although there is talk that Kelly's boyfriend will be buying her
a laptop and that will have Vista on it but I've told her that's not
allowed she can't have it before me g
Joan

Compared to Ubuntu Beryl, Aero looks like it was done as an after
thought by someone in Redmond's mail room.

Here's a video to show you the difference:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ

I just put the cd in to see what you meant - since I've never noticed
anything as finished in Ubuntu - or any version of Linux, for that matter -
as the Windows interface. Some come close. But the difference between us is
not really that you think that Linux is superior to Windows and I vice
versa - it is that I freely admit this is just my opinion, while you keep
making these pronouncements as though they're indisputable Truth, not merely
your opinion, and the experience of others appears not to dent your absolute
conviction one whit - the implication of which is always going to be that
anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong.

Or is that what this 'Ubuntu' obsession is about? Were you a computer
operator/programmer/administrator back when it was a hermetic art and you
were revered for your arcane knowledge? Then along came Windows and now
you're 'just this guy'? So you keep rattling on about Ubuntu so when most
people find it difficult to use you'll be held in awe again?

Hey, you can scoff, but every street in every town in every country on Earth
has at least one guy who absolutely will not entertain the possibility that
he might be mistaken - and everybody else in the world knows it, knows that
'he always has to be right!'. The irony is that there will be those that
think I'm really talking about myself - and to them I say this is my own
sermon from the mount: the only way to avoid self-deception is to constantly
guard against it. The biggest self-deceivers are the ones who say they never
do it. Otherwise every last one of us does it, every day of our lives. And
it's about the last thing anyone wants to accept, therefore they keep doing
it.

"Here in my tittle-tattle little world
Of what I whittle down
To meet my preconceptions,
Thus to justify my fears,
In a box, as rare as spittle,
Just another Human skittle
Honing powers of deception
- So to dream another year"

And the one about the Pelican.

Linux trolls want everyone to be in awe of their ability to use the thing
when most give up after the first hour wasted trying to get the thing to do
something as basic as go online - especially if previously they spent an
entire day or two trying before realising that Linux simply doesn't support
their modem unless - as they found researching it on the net (in
Windows) they write their own driver!

It isn't too many years ago - though a year is a long time in computing, of
course - that I was set to write my own soft-modem driver. I could have done
it but the time it would have taken simply was not worth it...I had two or
three Windows installations up and running. Where is the gain in writing
your own driver for an OS who's developers failed to provide it themselves?
An alternative graphical user interface operating system is a nice idea, but
when you have to jump through hoops to get it to run - assuming you ever
can - the point is lost. And just how good is a system going to be once you
do get it set up, when you have to go through so much hassle to get there?

It's a rhetorical question.

But maybe it *would* be good! Only if the lack of perspective demonstrated
by those who recommend it unreservedly is reflected in it's inner workings,
then just forget about it. It begins to look like it's all about denial in
extremis.

Now I've binned the Ubuntu cd. I've had enough! On the old computer it
wouldn't just *run* and on the new computer it won't just *run*. On the old
computer it didn't support my trinitron-based monitor to the extent of
allowing me to configure it without going online first (see above) and
downloading a driver. Well, in that respect it was better than Windows for
Workgroups 3.11 - though I can finally run *that* with modern graphics in
Virtual PC (which Ubuntu hangs in). I am even used to Linux distros
supporting my monitor prior to Ubuntu. Ubuntu is the first OS since WFWG3.11
I'd run that I couldn't configure the video the way I wanted it in!

And now it wants to go online - only of course, it fails to! - to get
drivers for the reasonably recent (128MB) nVidia card! It *recognises* the
card - just doesn't have drivers for it. Tries to go online. Fails. Because
the modem hasn't been configured. I still haven't got a Linux distro to go
online with the current, common-as-muck and correctly identified (as ever,
but to no purpose) USB modems. No problem whatsoever in any recent version
of Windows! In fact, no problem in Server 2008 x64 beta 3 - what I've done
most of my running Aero in. So I can put a beta of a 64-bit Windows OS not
due for release until next year and not even at the RC stage and within 5
minutes the modem and the graphics card drivers are installed and it all
works very well. But this Ubuntu you keep rattling on about won't go online
and won't run 'Beryl' until it does, because it doesn't have the drivers for
a 128MB GeForce card (bought just a few months ago) like previously it
didn't have them for my Trinitron-baced CRT monitor (which still works well,
incidentally, but is sitting, boxed up and awaiting some use).

I don't care to spend the rest of the day trying to get Ubuntu to work. If
you think it is a serious rival for Windows, you need your head looking at.

So Alias, are you trying to lead people the way the stage magician does, to
accept your statement, or do you honestly believe you *can* make a judgement
on visual quality of either system, from such a low quality video? And I
don't recall what your Vista experience was, but preisely the same applies
to the question of whether you think - even if that video was crystal clear
and high res - that anyone can make such a judgement in a couple of minutes?
My 'report' is specifically about having come to like something that I
initially hated. It is about the necessity for time in order to make value
judgements. Presumably you didn't read my post, that Joan was responding to,
since if you're proposing that these interfaces can be definitively judged
in two minutes, you are clearly identifying with the 'shallow' users I
referred to.

Meanwhile, you can paint me as you like - you may have noticed I don't
particularly care what people think of me - but should we just write you off
as an Ubuntu obsessive? I mean, apart from the various update notifications,
most of your posts are indistinguishable from Ubuntu spam these days. Is it
your hobby horse or are you somehow connected with the project and
conveniently failing to mention it?

See, you can write both Mart and myself off as computer novices, if you
like, but believe you me, if neither of *us* can set Ubuntu up without
encountering severe difficulties, then the vast majority of the world's
personal computer users certainly cannot. I for one do not consider myself a
*guru* - but I do know so much more than the average user you'd need a
computer to calculate it! I'm sure all of us here have always considered you
intelligent enough to 'get' the implications of such a rather obvious fact.
You put the Windows cd in - one hour later you're surfing the net, writing
e-mails or work-related documents, listening to music etc. Put a Linux cd in
and, unless you're one of the lucky ones, an hour later you're pulling you
hair out. Are you going to ignore this inconvenient fact forever Alias?

Do you think that if it works for you, it works for everybody?

Or to you just want to goad me into an argument, because you can't get
enough of them? After all, it was guaranteed, wasn't it.


Shane


I don't know why you had so much trouble. My child and I just installed
Ubuntu on her AMD2 4600+ with 2 gigs of RAM and a PCI Express 512 nVidia
card and we were done in 58 minutes, including all the updates and
programs. My kid was amazed at how *easy* it was and how *fast* it was
compared to installing XP on the same machine.

I'm sorry, but I am not going to address the rest of your post because I
am not really here to discuss Ubuntu. If you really want to install it,
you'll ask for help in the appropriate forum instead of tossing up your
hands and throwing the CD into the trash.

--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes

Shane,
I haven't had the chance to try Vista yet, but I wanted to comment on
this one point. Internet Explorer is and always has been Windows Explorer.
Try this on the old WinME machine. Open an internet explorer session, then
type C:\ in the address bar, and it's transformed to Windows Explorer. It's
a trick that comes in handy in WinXP when you have multiple users and
different access levels. I'm not aware of an easy way to do "run as" on
Windows Explorer, but you can do a "run as" on Internet Explorer and you can
just switch over from there. One was built right on top of the other.

"Shane" wrote in message
...
I don't like it - the new Windows Explorer, I mean. Oh, you get used to
it - but it's too much of the same. Making everything web is like losing
the seperation between work and home. I like working in Explorer as
distinct from the internet, in 9x, or here in XP. It is like getting back
home, putting on your slippers, relaxing. I don't think they understand
that at the global conglomerates.


Shane