A Windows 98 & ME forum. Win98banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Win98banter forum » Windows 98 » Setup & Installation
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Windows Software is Simply Bad Software



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 18th 05, 05:47 AM
winluser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windows Software is Simply Bad Software

It won't do you any good to keep deleting my posts. Everyone already
knows that MS products are crap. The very fact that you censor posts
only shows how afraid you are of the truth.

MS software has a widespread reputation on the net for crashing, being
filled with security holes, being bloatware, and generally just being
bad software.

The fact that win98 SE won't work on fast machines is only a minuscule
example for the megabytes of posts that show that Win OS's are
programmed poorly and do not stand up to consumers demands.

Just google any MS software and you will find a myriad of complaints
about how their os's etc crash systems, do not work as intended and are
a sieve for hackers. It is common knowledge, so deleting my posts won't
help. Have a nice day and I'd follow up with that appointment for
therapy-you are seriously in need of a reality check.



From: "Gary S. Terhune"
References:



Subject: GA-7zx install problems
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:54:21 -0700
Lines: 107
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Message-ID:
Newsgroups:
alt.windows98,microsoft.public.win98.setup,comp.os .ms-windows.misc
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.106.181.221 Path:
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.max well.syr.edu!
news.ma
xwell.syr.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!msrtrans!TK2MSFTNGP 08.phx.gbl!
TK2MSFTNGP15
..phx.gbl Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.windows98:460441
microsoft.public.win98.setup:55177 comp.os.ms-windows.misc:51982

When someone complains that a specific version of Windows eventually
runs into this or that problem with hardware that is released after the
OS, particularly when that someone gloms onto such a minute detail (and
one that was fixed, whatever the author thinks of the solution) and
cites it as an example of Windows being a POS, I have to immediately
dismiss them as being utterly illogical.

Doesn't change my position. The problem here isn't Windows. It *may* be
hardware (cf. my own example, which involved XP, an OS that runs just
fine on lots faster hardware than I have.) But in this particular case,
it's user error, nothing more, nothing less.

Simply put, there's millions upon millions of fast machines running
Win9x systems with no problem whatsoever. The number of people running 1
to 2 GHz machines at 133/266 or faster that have this problem is
miniscule in comparison.

No, what we have here are simply a bunch of idiots. Idiots with
incredibly poor manners and absolutely ridiculous attitudes towards the
rest of the world at large. Bunch of whiners, really.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User

"anyone" wrote in message
...
And from another source who also recognizes the fatal faults in
windows products: (repeated post, either did not propogate or was
rogue cancelled)

Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte
From: "Stephen T Cripps" - Find messages
by this author Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 08:05:35 -0000
Local: Sat, Jan 27 2001 3:05 am
Subject: Win98 install on GA-7ZX problem
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original
| Report Abuse

There is another problem with Windows on newer, faster systems:
basically the computer is too fast for Windows. When using a fast bus
and a fast harddrive with a large cache (typically 2Mb), when Windows
closes it sends its final data, including finalising the registry, to
the HDD. The cache rapidly fills and gradually (in comparison) starts
writing to disk. Windows, happy that the data has all been sent to
disk, sends an ATX power-off request to the motherboard, which gladly
complies and pulls the plug. The net result is that anything still
left in the HDD cache is dumped. The typical symptom is as described:
an apparently normal shut-down, followed by a registry scan/repair on
start-up.


Microsoft has a knowledge base article (Q273017) in which they
describe the problem as affecting 900MHz+. I have had 800s fail and I
think the key is more bus speed (always 133) and disk transfer speed
and cache size (ATA100 and 2Mb+). I can see the problem getting worse
with the advent of DDR and 200/266 bus speeds. Microsoft have issued
a hot-fix, whilst denying all responsibility. The fix replaces the
ifsmgr.vxd (IDE file system manager virtual device driver) with a new
one, to recognize a new registry setting. The setting provides a short
delay on shut-down, to give the HDD time to finish. I feel this is a
poor fix as there is still no actual confirmation that the HDD is
done, just an arbitrary delay 'that should be long enough'.


If you need the hot-fix file, I need your platform type (only released
for Win Me or Win 98SE) and email address. I hope this helps.


--


Stephen T Cripps
Proprietor
MFS



www.m-f-solutions.mcmail.com


herman wrote in :

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

Wow! That's two people in one pass that I'm plonking. First time in
several months. Congratulations!

I've changed my opinion. In both yours and everyman's cases, the
obvious problem above all others is BCAK.

ROFL!! Good luck with your BSD, etc.



The truth hurts, I guess. Billy boy's products are living testimony
that quality and market share do not go together. It is too bad the
users have to use bad OS's because some greedy incompetent company
cannot manage to make money and produce reliable products at the
same time.








  #2  
Old October 18th 05, 01:34 PM
Ron Badour
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windows Software is Simply Bad Software

"winluser" wrote in message
...
It won't do you any good to keep deleting my posts. Everyone already
knows that MS products are crap. The very fact that you censor posts
only shows how afraid you are of the truth.


MS does not censor posts unless they are advertisements or spam or contain
offensive language. If you cannot see prior posts, there is a reason for it
like having a newsreader setting set that keeps it from being displayed,
sufficient time has passed for the post to have dropped off, posts being
purged by news services other than microsoft.com, etc. This is the only
post you have made using

The fact that win98 SE won't work on fast machines is only a minuscule
example for the megabytes of posts that show that Win OS's are
programmed poorly and do not stand up to consumers demands.


Work on W98 started in 1995 when the fastest CPU was a P1 133 MHz and the
largest hard drive was 2.1 GB. Anyone smart enough to design an operating
system for hardware that has not yet been invented has a job waiting for
them at Redmond.
--
Regards


Ron Badour, MS MVP for W98
Tips:
http://home.satx.rr.com/badour
Knowledge Base Info:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo




  #3  
Old October 18th 05, 08:56 PM
Spajky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windows Software is Simply Bad Software

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:47:50 +0000 (UTC), winluser
wrote:

The fact that win98 SE won't work on fast machines...


where the hell did you got that info (I have not seen yet that won´t
run on any x86 CPU!) ...

--
Regards , SPAJKY ®
mail addr. @ my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
  #4  
Old October 18th 05, 09:23 PM
Gary S. Terhune
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windows Software is Simply Bad Software

SPAJKY & Ron,

You're addressing a troll who previously posted under "everyman" or "herman"
or "anyone" and is whining because his POS Giga-Byte motherboard falls flat
on its face when running at full speed and installing Windows. It's blaming
Windows instead of the AIFOTM.

I plonked those aliases, which I believe is what it's referring to when it
mentions "deleting posts".

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User

"Spajky" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:47:50 +0000 (UTC), winluser
wrote:

The fact that win98 SE won't work on fast machines...


where the hell did you got that info (I have not seen yet that wont
run on any x86 CPU!) ...

--
Regards , SPAJKY
mail addr. @ my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
"Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"



  #5  
Old October 25th 05, 02:42 AM
internetuse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Windows Software is Simply Bad Software

The basic problem is that Unix is the result of seeking academic perfection.

Microsoft is about making money.

As any former developer who also had to work with Windows will tell you,
Windows means work around, and noticing the marketing department made choices
in what bugs they spent the money on fixing.

I can break anything MS writes for that reason, and learned to read through
the source code for the actual coding of even the standard libraries included
with the SDK.

Given the objective is financial, I would point out that MS has met its
objectives, and until someone or something creates enough competition to make
those bug lists a major issue, the issue of how much to spend will always be
there.

As an opener on that topic, I read that Tiger has actual security and is
based on a labor of academic perfection in which it is not also an open sieve
to anybody who walks up to or directs a process to the computer.

I go back to Windows 2.1 when I had an entire LIMS system crash due to an
upgrade of DOS 3.3 to DOS 4, and MS did not have customer service, which
resulted in having to have a local technician in a computer store who just
felt bad for me, walk me through hardware by phone like someone directing a
delivery by phone so I could use the 5-1/4 to reload DOS 3.3 before the EPA
started assessing thousands in fines the next day for not having samples
processed and analysis reported. The entire system used to lock up when the
last pixel was in use even with DOS 3.3 underneath.

"winluser" wrote:

It won't do you any good to keep deleting my posts. Everyone already
knows that MS products are crap. The very fact that you censor posts
only shows how afraid you are of the truth.

MS software has a widespread reputation on the net for crashing, being
filled with security holes, being bloatware, and generally just being
bad software.

The fact that win98 SE won't work on fast machines is only a minuscule
example for the megabytes of posts that show that Win OS's are
programmed poorly and do not stand up to consumers demands.

Just google any MS software and you will find a myriad of complaints
about how their os's etc crash systems, do not work as intended and are
a sieve for hackers. It is common knowledge, so deleting my posts won't
help. Have a nice day and I'd follow up with that appointment for
therapy-you are seriously in need of a reality check.



From: "Gary S. Terhune"
References:



Subject: GA-7zx install problems
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:54:21 -0700
Lines: 107
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Message-ID:
Newsgroups:
alt.windows98,microsoft.public.win98.setup,comp.os .ms-windows.misc
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.106.181.221 Path:
dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.max well.syr.edu!
news.ma
xwell.syr.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!msrtrans!TK2MSFTNGP 08.phx.gbl!
TK2MSFTNGP15
..phx.gbl Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.windows98:460441
microsoft.public.win98.setup:55177 comp.os.ms-windows.misc:51982

When someone complains that a specific version of Windows eventually
runs into this or that problem with hardware that is released after the
OS, particularly when that someone gloms onto such a minute detail (and
one that was fixed, whatever the author thinks of the solution) and
cites it as an example of Windows being a POS, I have to immediately
dismiss them as being utterly illogical.

Doesn't change my position. The problem here isn't Windows. It *may* be
hardware (cf. my own example, which involved XP, an OS that runs just
fine on lots faster hardware than I have.) But in this particular case,
it's user error, nothing more, nothing less.

Simply put, there's millions upon millions of fast machines running
Win9x systems with no problem whatsoever. The number of people running 1
to 2 GHz machines at 133/266 or faster that have this problem is
miniscule in comparison.

No, what we have here are simply a bunch of idiots. Idiots with
incredibly poor manners and absolutely ridiculous attitudes towards the
rest of the world at large. Bunch of whiners, really.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User

"anyone" wrote in message
...
And from another source who also recognizes the fatal faults in
windows products: (repeated post, either did not propogate or was
rogue cancelled)

Newsgroups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.giga-byte
From: "Stephen T Cripps" - Find messages
by this author Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 08:05:35 -0000
Local: Sat, Jan 27 2001 3:05 am
Subject: Win98 install on GA-7ZX problem
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original
| Report Abuse

There is another problem with Windows on newer, faster systems:
basically the computer is too fast for Windows. When using a fast bus
and a fast harddrive with a large cache (typically 2Mb), when Windows
closes it sends its final data, including finalising the registry, to
the HDD. The cache rapidly fills and gradually (in comparison) starts
writing to disk. Windows, happy that the data has all been sent to
disk, sends an ATX power-off request to the motherboard, which gladly
complies and pulls the plug. The net result is that anything still
left in the HDD cache is dumped. The typical symptom is as described:
an apparently normal shut-down, followed by a registry scan/repair on
start-up.


Microsoft has a knowledge base article (Q273017) in which they
describe the problem as affecting 900MHz+. I have had 800s fail and I
think the key is more bus speed (always 133) and disk transfer speed
and cache size (ATA100 and 2Mb+). I can see the problem getting worse
with the advent of DDR and 200/266 bus speeds. Microsoft have issued
a hot-fix, whilst denying all responsibility. The fix replaces the
ifsmgr.vxd (IDE file system manager virtual device driver) with a new
one, to recognize a new registry setting. The setting provides a short
delay on shut-down, to give the HDD time to finish. I feel this is a
poor fix as there is still no actual confirmation that the HDD is
done, just an arbitrary delay 'that should be long enough'.


If you need the hot-fix file, I need your platform type (only released
for Win Me or Win 98SE) and email address. I hope this helps.


--


Stephen T Cripps
Proprietor
MFS



www.m-f-solutions.mcmail.com


herman wrote in :

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote in
:

Wow! That's two people in one pass that I'm plonking. First time in
several months. Congratulations!

I've changed my opinion. In both yours and everyman's cases, the
obvious problem above all others is BCAK.

ROFL!! Good luck with your BSD, etc.


The truth hurts, I guess. Billy boy's products are living testimony
that quality and market share do not go together. It is too bad the
users have to use bad OS's because some greedy incompetent company
cannot manage to make money and produce reliable products at the
same time.









 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can't connect to my network printer Martin Healy Networking 8 July 6th 05 10:35 PM
msgsrv32.exe General 5 June 30th 05 10:34 PM
Win'98SE & IE 6 Gary S. Terhune General 269 February 23rd 05 05:20 AM
Registery problem? Paul General 15 December 8th 04 11:29 AM
error loading explorer.exe. SHLWAPI.dll Gary General 4 October 20th 04 04:08 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 Win98banter.
The comments are property of their posters.