vista is defective

Hehe, last post on this, but yes, I see how it can be perceived as "how-to"
as well.

Cheers!


"norm" wrote in message

> Yeah-whatever wrote:
>> "norm" wrote in message
>>
>>> idaspud wrote:
>>>> norm wrote:
>>>>> Yeah-whatever wrote:
>>>>>> LOL Allrighty then, did we get our feathers a little ruffled? ...And
>>>>>> for no real reason...
>>>>> snipped
>>>>>> LOL of course they are, and of course I am behind a router. LOL But
>>>>>> again I made a point and if you go to the Ubuntu security page, they
>>>>>> advocate the use of a firewall and how to install it, so that's what
>>>>>> the general user must figure out if they want one.
>>>>> Can you please cite the specific url? My default kubuntu installation
>>>>> includes iptables (set by default for NO open ports). One can install
>>>>> any of several gui frontends to manage iptables should one desire to
>>>>> do so. However, I am not sure of the need to do so just on general
>>>>> principles.
>>>>>
>>>>> snipped
>>>>>
>>>> Sheesh, having done the work for you, here is the URL:
>>>>
>>>> https://help.ubuntu.com/7.04/keeping-safe/C/firewall.html
>>>>
>>>> ...This is a sub link under "Keeping your computer safe" "Set up a
>>>> firewall"
>>>>
>>>> Note that it says "Optionally install." (iptables or not, they still
>>>> recommend one on their security site) Yes, iptables is on here, but is
>>>> not a full fledged, front end, easy to find, (for the "general" user),
>>>> for configuration, firewall, which is what I was referring to. People
>>>> who have done their homework want to SEE that, and those clueless ones
>>>> leaving themselves exposed to the net should have one for at least some
>>>> degree of added protection. (Better-than-nothing)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, people want to SEE that sort of stuff. Can't tell you how many
>>>> of my clients get worried simply because they have no visual. They
>>>> don't care what is behind the scenes, they want to SEE that something
>>>> is protecting them. So if it's a front end firewall with an icon and
>>>> everything, (lol), so be it. If they read on the Ubuntu page they
>>>> should install an optional, (= Not included in the original install),
>>>> then they want it. I'm saying if Ubuntu recommends one, then just
>>>> INCLUDE one and be done with it. Trim a game or something needless, and
>>>> include a firewall. (CD size limits)
>>>>
>>>> Whatever, I believe my original points are valid. And once again, my
>>>> mission is NOT to put one OS or the other down, but to simply show that
>>>> NOTHING is flawless and you CAN have problems no matter what OS you
>>>> choose...
>>>>
>>>> "I just don't like people being bamboozled into one direction or
>>>> another."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> G'day
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thanks for the work in providing the link. I don't, however, see the
>>> info from the link being described as "advocating" (your term) or even
>>> "recommending" (your term). Just because something is written about does
>>> not necessarily place it in the realm of advocacy or recommendation. If
>>> anyone wishes to have the functionality that you or your client(s) think
>>> they should have or need, then one can easily have it. But it does not
>>> follow that such functionality should be included by default, or that
>>> such functionality is even desired by all who use ubuntu. And people who
>>> "do" their homework will be able to find what they need and desire with
>>> very little effort.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, I was sort of rude about looking up the link for you. ..And yer
>> welcome.
>>
>> Not a recommendation? Even if implied, it's still a recommendation.
>> Why else would they bother with the page at all, and say, "Keeping your
>> computer safe?" ...And then have 6 links on how to do it? I suppose one
>> could just view it as "suggestions" However they make no actual statement
>> either way, so I guess take it as you will. I, and others take it as
>> recommendations. So these [direct quotes] are not recommendations?:
>> "However, in order to keep your computer and documents safe, it is
>> important to use a separate user account for each person that uses the
>> computer." You should update your computer in order to keep it safe."
>> "Set up a firewall" "Lock your screen while away." "Avoid Internet
>> nuisances and crime." And, "Make backup copies of your files." Every
>> security site I have visited call these "Recommendations." Just because
>> Ubuntu documentation people didn't feel it necessary to actually label
>> recommendations as recommendations, doesn't mean they aren't.
>>
>> Hairs are starting to get split here, which I want no part of. No offence
>> Norm, but I stand fast with my original point and post, and am done with
>> this.
>>
>> G'day
> I only asked for the link because it would provide the opportunity for me
> to reference the same info. I can see how one might perceive it
> differently, but to me, the site is providing "how-to" information. Have a
> good one.
>
> --
> norm
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

Derrogatory comments such as this written by "seven" should be deleted by
Microsoft. They are not helpful to the problems. Wheelman is right! There
should be more effort on Microsoft's part to provide a product that does what
it is supposed to do, and they should also be required to provide updates for
as long ass they hold on to the copyright to that product. If they don't
continue to provide updates to keep the product functioning as it was
supposed to do, then they should forfeit copyright protections. There are a
number of flaws in Vista and Microsoft should be responsible for correcting
them into perpetuity if they wish to maintain the copyright to the product!

"seven" wrote:

> "wheelman" wrote in message
>
> > we went out and bought vista os,it says on the box,vista operating
> > system.did
> > any one else,think at the time they were buying an incomplete product..or
> > did
> > you think in that box,for your money,there was a complete operating
> > system.
> >
> > when you installed it,you had problems,of all kinds or it didnt work at
> > all,if you were lucky.real lucky.it installed what there was of an os off
> > of
> > the dvd and went..for the 31 updates..that microsoft has put out,to try
> > and
> > make the os,thats defective.to hopefuly work and as you found out,things
> > are
> > still not working and there are more updates to come and even service
> > packs.
> >
> > to try and patch this defective os..if you have to do a full
> > reinstall,like
> > i did,you have to go and get all of those updates and patches,,the service
> > packs.does any one feel.like they got what they paid for when they bought
> > that windows vista box.they knew that this was a defective os and they
> > knew
> > what was in this box that they sold the public.
> >
> > what would you say to any other corp,that did this to you..they cheated
> > people out of millions of dollars..the whole product is not in that box,on
> > that dvd..i dont understand why they cant be held accountiable for there
> > actions..redo the operating system and send me a new dvd..give me what i
> > paid
> > for..wheres that lawyer..who wouldnt sign up...
>
>
> get back in the road and wait for that big red truck.
> my lawyer is working on a case against people who use all small letters.
> you should try linux because vista is way to complex for you and your mother
> should limit your time on the computer
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

DRD78 wrote:
> Derrogatory comments such as this written by "seven" should be
> deleted by Microsoft. They are not helpful to the problems.
> Wheelman is right! There should be more effort on Microsoft's part
> to provide a product that does what it is supposed to do, and they
> should also be required to provide updates for as long ass they
> hold on to the copyright to that product. If they don't continue
> to provide updates to keep the product functioning as it was
> supposed to do, then they should forfeit copyright protections.
> There are a number of flaws in Vista and Microsoft should be
> responsible for correcting them into perpetuity if they wish to
> maintain the copyright to the product!

Wha?

OH! Another one of those people who only respond to postings made... wow -
that one is approaching 3 years old.

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windows.vista.general/...wse_frm

You must be posting from some leech site that took it from its original
newsgroup posting and synched it onto its own forum so it looked like they
had traffic and/or you think people are still monitoring the conversation
that ended in ... November 2007?

Many people consider Windows Vista to be just like Windows ME - a stop-gap
measure that was pushed too hard by public relations (Windows ME was
relatively silent, not all that great and faded into obscurity even to the
point that Microsoft rarely mentions it.)

That's too bad. I know it worked for me for quite some time - although
admittedly I still ran (still do on rarer occasions) Windows XP for certain
things. In any case - some of the issues people blame on the OS are often
hardware related (the responsibility of the vendor and/or the lack of
understanding on the end-user's part.)

No matter - other than your response - I do not see the reply you speak of
(could be overlooking it in the really old/archived version of the original
posting or the leech site you posted to is the only one carrying that
particular thread of the conversation...) As far as your comment that it ,
"should be deleted by Microsoft." --> yeah, because that is what we need,
more censorship because people cannot handle a few insults or differing
opinions. Pretty up the world so everyone things there is no bad comments
ever made so that when they come across it - they have no clue how to
react.

Anyway - the original newsgroup will be gone soon enough and all we will be
left with is the leech sites and archives spread all over the Internet. So
be it.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

On 4 July, 00:14, "Shenan Stanley" wrote:
> DRD78 wrote:
> > Derrogatory comments such as this written by "seven" should be
> > deleted by Microsoft.  They are not helpful to the problems.
> > Wheelman is right!  There should be more effort on Microsoft's part
> > to provide a product that does what it is supposed to do, and they
> > should also be required to provide updates for as long ass they
> > hold on to the copyright to that product.  If they don't continue
> > to provide updates to keep the product functioning as it was
> > supposed to do, then they should forfeit copyright protections.
> > There are a number of flaws in Vista and Microsoft should be
> > responsible for correcting them into perpetuity if they wish to
> > maintain the copyright to the product!
>
> Wha?
>
> OH!  Another one of those people who only respond to postings made...  wow -
> that one is approaching 3 years old.
>

So... they only respond to postings etc., eh? They don't eat, drink,
sleep, do any
of the essentials of life, they only respond to postings....
interesting.

> http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windows.vista.general...
>
> You must be posting from some leech site that took it from its original
> newsgroup posting and synched it onto its own forum so it looked like they
> had traffic and/or you think people are still monitoring the conversation
> that ended in ...  November 2007?
>

Evidently you are....

> Many people consider Windows Vista to be just like Windows ME - a stop-gap
> measure that was pushed too hard by public relations (Windows ME was
> relatively silent, not all that great and faded into obscurity even to the
> point that Microsoft rarely mentions it.)
>
> That's too bad.  I know it worked for me for quite some time - although
> admittedly I still ran (still do on rarer occasions) Windows XP for certain
> things.  In any case - some of the issues people blame on the OS are often
> hardware related (the responsibility of the vendor and/or the lack of
> understanding on the end-user's part.)
>
> No matter - other than your response - I do not see the reply you speak of
> (could be overlooking it in the really old/archived version of the original
> posting or the leech site you posted to is the only one carrying that
> particular thread of the conversation...)  As far as your comment that it ,
> "should be deleted by Microsoft." --> yeah, because that is what we need,
> more censorship because people cannot handle a few insults or differing
> opinions.

Oh... you mean... like your reaction to me? Interesting.

> Pretty up the world so everyone things there is no bad comments

"....everyone things there is no bad comments....". Fascinating.

<snip>

Mark Houlsby
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

Mark Houlsby wrote: > On 4 July, 00:14, "Shenan Stanley"
wrote: > > DRD78 wrote: > > > Derrogatory
comments such as this written by "seven" should be > > > deleted by
Microsoft.  They are not helpful to the problems. > > > Wheelman is
right!  There should be more effort on Microsoft's part > > > to
provide a product that does what it is supposed to do, and they > > >
should also be required to provide updates for as long ass they > > >
hold on to the copyright to that product.  If they don't continue > >
> to provide updates to keep the product functioning as it was > > >
supposed to do, then they should forfeit copyright protections. > > >
There are a number of flaws in Vista and Microsoft should be > > >
responsible for correcting them into perpetuity if they wish to > > >
maintain the copyright to the product! > > > > Wha? > > > > OH!
 Another one of those people who only respond to postings made...  wow
- > > that one is approaching 3 years old. > > > > So... they only
respond t
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

You're an idiot.
Everyone's using Windows7 now, but you can elect to be an idiot.

Go play with Betamax VCR also.
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

On 4 July, 10:16, Kevin John Panzke wrote:
> Mark Houlsby wrote: > On 4 July, 00:14, "Shenan Stanley"
> wrote: > > DRD78 wrote: > > > Derrogatory
>
> comments such as this written by "seven" should be > > > deleted by
> Microsoft.  They are not helpful to the problems. > > > Wheelman is
> right!  There should be more effort on Microsoft's part > > > to
> provide a product that does what it is supposed to do, and they > > >
> should also be required to provide updates for as long ass they > > >
> hold on to the copyright to that product.  If they don't continue > >> to provide updates to keep the product functioning as it was > > >
>
> supposed to do, then they should forfeit copyright protections. > > >
> There are a number of flaws in Vista and Microsoft should be > > >
> responsible for correcting them into perpetuity if they wish to > > >
> maintain the copyright to the product! > > > > Wha? > > > > OH!
>  Another one of those people who only respond to postings made...  wow
> - > > that one is approaching 3 years old. > > > > So... they only
> respond t

Guess again.
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective 

"Ibrahim Al-Qassam (Abdelaziz)" wrote in
message
> You're an idiot.
> Everyone's using Windows7 now, but you can elect to be an idiot.
>
> Go play with Betamax VCR also.


Not true! Not "everybody" is using Windows 7 you idiot!

Ibrahim, go and play with some weedkiller and do us all a favour and blow
yourself up!
 >> Stay informed about: vista is defective