Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... >| "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H >| CY2008. This date is preliminary." >| >| http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx > > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3. > And, they always say it's preliminary ;-) > Nobody pre-announces without caveats, not software, not hardware, not anything. Too much possibility of bad PR if the date is missed for any reason good, bad, or indifferent. I cannot fault MS for being vague about SP3, especially since they would much rather sell a Vista upgrade or a new PC with Vista installed than encourage it's installed base to stay on XP any longer than necessary. But, they will do an SP because it saves THEM manpower and money they'd rather put towards the next better mousetrap. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Ken Blake, MVP added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... >> "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H >> CY2008. This date is preliminary." > >> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx > > As I said, no announcement has been made. "Currently planned" > and "preliminary" does not amount to an announcement. It is > very common that such dates turn out not to be met. Certainly cannot fault you or MS for this statement, which I highly agree with. If I may be allowed yet another car analogy, we do NOT announce future products unless and until there is a sales and marketing reason, e.g., at a major car show such as NAIAS where almost all the major new products for the fall season are shown for the first time. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Bob I Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO, they aren't responsible for the apps. student wrote: > ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app? > > > On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > >>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you >>control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write programs >>to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately >>blamed. Be objective. >>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >> >>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour >>>... >>> >>> >>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>>programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>>programs. >>> >>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips >>>body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball >>>or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that >>>reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise >>>good system and are more harm than good most of the time. >>> >>>-- >>>HP, aka Jerry >> >>
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO, > they aren't responsible for the apps. Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure where the O/S side and the application side eventually come together and I would hope a company as large as MS would ensure that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing. No, that's not being sarcastic, just realistic as generally two very separate divisions of any company often do not talk to each other nearly enough. > student wrote: > >> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app? >> >> >> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: >> >>>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How >>>would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many >>>companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a >>>problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective. >>>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >>>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>> >>>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du >>>>jour ... >>>> >>>> >>>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non >>>>>MS programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan >>>>>protection? programs. >>>> >>>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at >>>>the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they >>>>must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it >>>>is certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the >>>>novices will wreck an otherwise good system and are more >>>>harm than good most of the time. >>>> >>>>-- >>>>HP, aka Jerry >>> >>> > > -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Unknown Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write an error free program? "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu... > ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app? > > > On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: >> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you >> control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write >> programs >> to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately >> blamed. Be objective. >> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour >>> ... >>> >>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>> programs. >>> >>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips >>> body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball >>> or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that >>> reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise >>> good system and are more harm than good most of the time. >>> >>> -- >>> HP, aka Jerry >> >>
Guest Unknown Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be objective not emotional. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... > Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour > ... > >> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How >> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many >> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a >> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective. > > Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough, > all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS, > that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't > mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they > have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have > a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those > who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK, > reverse engineering of several versions of the major components > of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages > of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS > like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its > copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers. > > I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that > naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and > misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all > kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC, > they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush > to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super > competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange > bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full > diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively > difficult. > > I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more > than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak, > but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of > improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating. > I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say > that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent > claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for > listening. > >> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du >>> jour ... >>> >>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>> programs. >>> >>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at >>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they >>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is >>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices >>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than >>> good most of the time. >>> >>> -- >>> HP, aka Jerry >> >> >> > > > > -- > HP, aka Jerry
Guest Unknown Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The advancement of PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look what they do today compared to two years ago. Advancement???? Windows 95, 98, NT, XP, now Windows Vista. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... > Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour > ... > >> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How >> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many >> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a >> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective. > > Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough, > all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS, > that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't > mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they > have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have > a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those > who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK, > reverse engineering of several versions of the major components > of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages > of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS > like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its > copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers. > > I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that > naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and > misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all > kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC, > they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush > to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super > competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange > bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full > diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively > difficult. > > I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more > than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak, > but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of > improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating. > I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say > that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent > claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for > listening. > >> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du >>> jour ... >>> >>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>> programs. >>> >>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at >>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they >>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is >>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices >>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than >>> good most of the time. >>> >>> -- >>> HP, aka Jerry >> >> >> > > > > -- > HP, aka Jerry
Guest Bob I Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? HEMI-Powered wrote: > Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > > >>MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO, >>they aren't responsible for the apps. > > > Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure where > the O/S side and the application side eventually come together > and I would hope a company as large as MS would ensure that the > left hand knows what the right hand is doing. No, that's not > being sarcastic, just realistic as generally two very separate > divisions of any company often do not talk to each other nearly > enough. > But you have to remember the whacking they got from the DOJ and the following requirement to "keep the boys from talking to eack other".
Guest Ken Blake, MVP Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett" <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: > > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008. > | This date is preliminary." > | > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx > > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3. No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced no dates. Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" indicate that these are rough estimates, not promises. If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing an estimate is not. > And, they > always say it's preliminary ;-) Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that when the date is far enough in the future that they are unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date and feel assured of making it, *then* they will announce a date. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... >>>MS in this case is the "MS Operating system folks". And NO, >>>they aren't responsible for the apps. >> >> Obviously this is true, but there IS a management structure >> where the O/S side and the application side eventually come >> together and I would hope a company as large as MS would >> ensure that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing. >> No, that's not being sarcastic, just realistic as generally >> two very separate divisions of any company often do not talk >> to each other nearly enough. >> > > But you have to remember the whacking they got from the DOJ > and the following requirement to "keep the boys from talking > to eack other". > Yep, sure do. And no matter what our personal opinions may be, they beat the rap as well as fighting off Apple. I'm hardly saying the court's decision was right and/or I agree, I'm just a commentin', that's all. I understand and agree with your point, still, unless MS is under some court order or restraining order or they fear a renewed attack, unlikely under the current Administration, I would think they would manage their company to maximize revenues and profits WITHOUT violating or even appearing to violate anti-trust laws by their internal actions. And again, I do not want to appear to be disputing you here, but I would think that Steve Balmer would WANT to also have the best possible quality software from ALL his divisions, doesn't that make sense. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of > significant size has them. However MS fixes theirs instead of > blaming others. Did you ever write an error free program? I sure as hell never came even close to bug free, and I go back to mainframe FORTRAN, then Apple ][, then PC. I believe it can be shown mathematically that it is impossible to guarantee bug-free code, and empirically as software gets more and more complex and must operate on more and more new HW and legacy HW and ditto for SW, the chances of a bug-free release quickly fade, IMO of course. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > If indeed you were a programmer particularly a > micro-programmer then you should have enough experience to > recognize the complexity of an operating system plus all the > micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in > development you would know that regardless of the amount of > testing some bugs will show up after release. How can you > possibly be so critical of a few bugs? Compare today's PC's > with those of just a few years ago. Be objective not > emotional. Sorry, can't follow the quotes. Are you talking to me or someone else? If me, then see my other post just a minute ago. While I never did O/S or systems software, I was always an applications programmer, I DO understand the complexity of even a 2-bit O/S such as Apple's old Dos 3.1 on the ][, so yes, by the time we got to Win 3.1, 95/98, XP, and now Vista, there is no longer any hope of a free ride. And, I hope that sounds reasonably objective and realistic, and NOT either emotional or at all MS-bashing. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > Also, ask yourself "why is the situation deteriorating". The > advancement of PC's has been absolutely phenomenal. Look what > they do today compared to two years ago. Advancement???? This time I have the quotes straight. What I meant was that each successive release of Windows in the exact sequence you mention has been virtually an order of magnitude more complexity and lines of code, no matter of what type. So, again, I am hardly bashing MS or anyone, simply observing that /I/ feel that the situation is "deteriotating" in that Vista cannot help but be a problematical O/S until at least SP1, until at least all the HW manufacturers fully come on board with drivers, and all the major SW developers do the same. That's not being negative, it is being practical. As I'm sure you're aware, my watchword is that I will NOT beta test anyone's new anything with my Visa card. If others want to, that's fine by me. OK, friends? -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest student Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors told the class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an "F" for the paper for the errror in basic grammar. She was stopped only because a student told her that it is word & one could not change it to be correct as word will override & impose the bad grammatical error. The professor said she learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking. A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from putting mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any changes to correct ms crap. For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products on both compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a problem with drive letters on both my home & work computers; they were running os/2 & nt. Everything was working until the computers were booted up one day; it wasn't either a virus or trojan. ms claimed that my partition setup was wrong & sent a "white paper" showing how I should partition the drive; I replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how my drive partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie & do their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups. A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by "volunteers"; I don't think many of them were ever involved with ms on either genie or compuserve to know any better. Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got an email from the people who do the ms backup software at that time; don't remember the name as they have changed it but still in the ms os releases. The email doc show how they encountered & found that the problem was install process whereby the drive had to load into a dos partition then reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32). I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the ms os crashes....... Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in alt.usage.english said that there was a website that had listings of grammar & spelling problems with word; I never checked as have decided to stay with wordperfect mainly for the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things, hopefully. On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has > them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write > an error free program? > "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message > news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >> ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app? >> >> >> On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: >>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you >>> control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write >>> programs >>> to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately >>> blamed. Be objective. >>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour >>>> ... >>>> >>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>>> programs. >>>> >>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips >>>> body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball >>>> or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that >>>> reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise >>>> good system and are more harm than good most of the time. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> HP, aka Jerry >>> >>> > >
Guest student Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report that doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the printer for that person on the lan printer? especially the report was for the supervisor..... ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms support say that there is a virus; user say text only files can get printed just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say call you back later & is never here from again. A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or control equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the things that ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable. I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents" happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in windows, whats a few bugs... On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > If indeed you were a programmer particularly a micro-programmer then you > should have enough experience to recognize the complexity of an operating > system plus all the micro-code that operates the hardware. If you were in > development you would know that regardless of the amount of testing some > bugs will show up after release. How can you possibly be so critical of a > few bugs? Compare today's PC's with those of just a few years ago. Be > objective not emotional. > "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message > news:Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour >> ... >> >>> Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How >>> would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many >>> companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a >>> problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective. >> >> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough, >> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS, >> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't >> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they >> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have >> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those >> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK, >> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components >> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages >> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS >> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its >> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers. >> >> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that >> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and >> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all >> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC, >> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush >> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super >> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange >> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full >> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively >> difficult. >> >> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more >> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak, >> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of >> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating. >> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say >> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent >> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for >> listening. >> >>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >>> news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du >>>> jour ... >>>> >>>>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>>> programs. >>>> >>>> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at >>>> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they >>>> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is >>>> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices >>>> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than >>>> good most of the time. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> HP, aka Jerry >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> HP, aka Jerry > >
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? student added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors > told the class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an > "F" for the paper for the errror in basic grammar. She was > stopped only because a student told her that it is word & one > could not change it to be correct as word will override & > impose the bad grammatical error. The professor said she > learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking. One BIG thing is that Word likes active voice grammar, not passive as usually used in business letters and technical reports. I find the grammar checker to be completely useless, but the spell checker is quite good. > A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from > putting mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any > changes to correct ms crap. > > For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products > on both compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a > problem with drive letters on both my home & work computers; > they were running os/2 & nt. Everything was working until the > computers were booted up one day; it wasn't either a virus or > trojan. ms claimed that my partition setup was wrong & sent a > "white paper" showing how I should partition the drive; I > replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how my drive > partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms > announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie & > do their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups. > > A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by > "volunteers"; I don't think many of them were ever involved > with ms on either genie or compuserve to know any better. > > Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got > an email from the people who do the ms backup software at that > time; don't remember the name as they have changed it but > still in the ms os releases. The email doc show how they > encountered & found that the problem was install process > whereby the drive had to load into a dos partition then > reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32). > > I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the > ms os crashes....... > > Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in > alt.usage.english said that there was a website that had > listings of grammar & spelling problems with word; I never > checked as have decided to stay with wordperfect mainly for > the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things, hopefully. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? student added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > It would depend on the "few" bugs wouldn't it? like a report > that doesn't get printed because garbage was coming out of the > printer for that person on the lan printer? especially the > report was for the supervisor..... > > ms support say reload the driver which was already done; ms > support say that there is a virus; user say text only files > can get printed just word docs produce garbage. ms suport say > call you back later & is never here from again. > > A few bugs? I do hope windows isn't ever used on planes or > control equipment in hospitals. The os isn't ready to do the > things that ms claims if bugs & unreliability are acceptable. > > I now shudder that I heard in the news that it is intended to > have windows running some stuff in cars.......the "accidents" > happened, be reasonable, there are million lines of code in > windows, whats a few bugs... > A sophisticated modern car with lots of options/features may have 25 computers, sometimes more, all talking to each other over what amounts to be a LAN (not really, more like multi-plexed wiring, but a fair analogy). However, unlike a normal O/S or app, which must run on hundreds of old, fair, and new HW and with all sorts of legacy crap, car computers are 100% self-contained and the programmers ARE allowed to talk to each other. I do not know the exact number of lines of code in a modern car, but when I retired, I had a subordinate who was the patent holder (assign) for Chrysler's ignition key security. He believed it was in the 10s of millions back in 2001. Of course, car software from engine/trans controllers to simple power window switch controllers, are actually expected by customers AND the government testing agencies to last 10 years, 100,000 miles, and so are VERY rigorously tested. Ditto for expectatins of everything working in harmony from about 80 deg. below zero F to 150 deg, in dry, humid, driving rain, sleet, and blizzard snow conditions, and work well every time you unlock the door and start the car. And, they do a pretty fair job of it. However, bugs and not-so-nice features DO happen. I had an interesting one on a 2006 Jeep Liberty company lease car. The battery kept going dead because my wife is a short-distance driver and never really charged the battery enough. That one turned out to be a VERY minor bug in the gigantic body systems computer that was telling the batter to supply current to all the accessories in the car except the ignition and starter, so a fairly high amperage was always flowing. The Jeeps affected by this "bug" were all VOLUNTARILY recalled, the body computer chip (s) flashed or EPROM'd, whichever, and the problem was solved. I is a distant dream, but Bill Gates still comes to Detroit every year, hat in hand, trying to convince the car makers to use his stuff more in their cars. There IS more in Detroit than just the Detroit Three, BTW, the Asians and Europeans have small R & D centers here. Support for what would've been considered unheard of features in cars IS coming, e.g., MP3 players, iPod support, Blackberry support, and the like, but the car makers are pretty loathe to let Windows itself in their cars because they have no control over it and don't trust MS to keep it running. Remember that you cannot pull over and "reboot" if a car computer or accessory computer dies. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Tom Willett Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing different tentative release periods. "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com... | On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett" | <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: | | > | > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message | > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... | > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for 1H CY2008. | > | This date is preliminary." | > | | > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx | > | > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for SP3. | | | No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced no dates. | Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" indicate that these are | rough estimates, not promises. | | If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or change it, | that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing an estimate is not. | | | > And, they | > always say it's preliminary ;-) | | | Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that when the | date is far enough in the future that they are unsure of it. When they | are closer to a release date and feel assured of making it, *then* | they will announce a date. | | | -- | Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User | Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest ben Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? HEMI-Powered wrote: > I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next MS > compendium of fixes. First, MS's long track record of really bad > releases of not only individual patches but SPs has taught me to > be VERY wary of being the first kid on the block to install the > latest and greatest. e.g., I waited over a year after SP2 to be > sure that the early adopters were happy. While I obviously do not > think SP3 will be that big a deal as you say, there is still a > STRONG likelihood of a major blow-down upon install, especially > if it includes IE7. I say that because I have declined to install > maybe 10-15% of today's SP2 critical updates after lurking for > awhile in these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto > update turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong > philosophy of not trying to fix things that aren't broken, so if > I think I've gotten the updates I need/want - and I do think that > - then in all likelihood I will simply acquire SP3 but not > install it on my present PC. My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have never had any problems due to autoupdate.
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? ben added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > HEMI-Powered wrote: >> I agree with you about not getting enthralled with the next >> MS compendium of fixes. First, MS's long track record of >> really bad releases of not only individual patches but SPs >> has taught me to be VERY wary of being the first kid on the >> block to install the latest and greatest. e.g., I waited over >> a year after SP2 to be sure that the early adopters were >> happy. While I obviously do not think SP3 will be that big a >> deal as you say, there is still a STRONG likelihood of a >> major blow-down upon install, especially if it includes IE7. >> I say that because I have declined to install maybe 10-15% of >> today's SP2 critical updates after lurking for awhile in >> these many MS NGs and seeing that those with auto update >> turned on had grievous problems. And, I have a strong >> philosophy of not trying to fix things that aren't broken, so >> if I think I've gotten the updates I need/want - and I do >> think that - then in all likelihood I will simply acquire SP3 >> but not install it on my present PC. > > My PC is about 3 years old now with autoupdate on and have > never had any problems due to autoupdate. > Ben, I do not dispute the personal testimony of people, but MY experience personally, whilst managing PC support people for 15 years, knowing many technies AND listening to extreme tails of woe from people who literally went to bed with a fully functional PC and woke up to toast. So, please do what you think best and allow others, like myself, who take a more cautious approach. I do NOT let ANY SW or ANY device, including such simple things as my cell phone from auto-updating ANYthing. You know my two mottons on this: "don't try to fix things that aren't broken" and "never give Murphy an even break. I'll leave you with one super example of this. Countless people on these several support NGs as well as graphics app NGs such as Corel moan, groan and complain about blindly downloading the latest nVidia card drivers and completely destroying their systems, sometimes to the point of needing a nuke and reinstall of the whole shebang. nVidia, in this extreme example, is INfamous for releasing bugging, very unreliable driver updates, which is why I stopped buying their video cards 2 PCs ago and went with ATI. Good luck, I think you're going to need it - eventually. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Bob I Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Let me get this straight, you bollixed up your partitions 15 years ago, and STILL haven't gotten over it!?!?!?!?!? Actually you are the one that has a problem with grammar, and it sounds like your co-worker apparently couldn't find a menu selection if his life depended on it. This smells like a troll rant to me, "losted" indeed! student wrote: > ms word has a bad problem with grammar. One of my professors told the > class that she should go on the "warpath" & mark an "F" for the paper > for the errror in basic grammar. She was stopped only because a student > told her that it is word & one could not change it to be correct as > word will override & impose the bad grammatical error. The professor > said she learned to turn off word's grammar & spell checking. > > A former co-worker once asked how he can stop word from putting > mis-spelling on his report as word won't allow any changes to correct > ms crap. > > For the os, when ms was officially "supporting" their products on both > compuserve & genie in the early 1990's, I had a problem with drive > letters on both my home & work computers; they were running os/2 & nt. > Everything was working until the computers were booted up one day; > it wasn't either a virus or trojan. ms claimed that my partition > setup was wrong & sent a "white paper" showing how I should partition > the drive; I replied on compuserve that the doc shows exactly how > my drive partition were done. NO MORE replies from m$. Shortly ms > announced they wer abandoning support on compuserve & genie & do > their "support" on the usenet/internet newsgroups. > > A "mvp" claimed that the newsgroups were always done by "volunteers"; > I don't think many of them were ever involved with ms on either genie > or compuserve to know any better. > > Regarding the drive letter errors, a long(?) time later, I got an email > from the people who do the ms backup software at that time; don't > remember the name as they have changed it but still in the ms > os releases. The email doc show how they encountered & found that the > problem was install process whereby the drive had to load into a dos > partition then reformat/reconfure into fat32 or ntfs (more likely fat32). > > I tried to keep the doc, but it got "losted" during one of the ms > os crashes....... > > Regarding the ms word, a couple of years ago, someone in alt.usage.english > said that there was a website that had listings of grammar & spelling > problems with word; I never checked as have decided to stay with > wordperfect mainly for the "reveal codes" where I am able to "fix" things, > hopefully. > > > > > On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > >>Name one. There are some bugs; most every program of significant size has >>them. However MS fixes theirs instead of blaming others. Did you ever write >>an error free program? >>"student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message >>news:slrnfc437c.3ot.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >> >>>ms not responsible even when the app is an ms app? >>> >>> >>>On 2007-08-14, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: >>> >>>>Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How would you >>>>control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many companies write >>>>programs >>>>to run with XP (the OS) and when a problem occurs, MS is immediately >>>>blamed. Be objective. >>>>"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message >>>>news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >>>> >>>>>Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour >>>>>... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be >>>>>>amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS >>>>>>programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection? >>>>>>programs. >>>>> >>>>>That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at the hips >>>>>body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they must play ball >>>>>or risk losing their certification. But, it is certainly true that >>>>>reg cleaners in the hands of the novices will wreck an otherwise >>>>>good system and are more harm than good most of the time. >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>HP, aka Jerry >>>> >>>> >>
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing > different tentative release periods. Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on God's Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it has in it. Quite the contrary, you should be wary and cautious to the point of being frightened of the prospect if you intend to be an early adopter. I am NOT saying that MS EVER intentionally screws up, but they DO occasionally mess up a critical update or some other update. Hopefully, by the time an SP is put together, they've ascertained whatever the problem is and fixed it, or they may have simply ignored it if the number of bad reports is small. As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not whacking on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the burning need to know a firm date. It isn't like you're going to drop dead of cancer the next day if you don't download it and immediately install it. Do what you think best, of course. As for me, and many others, we will wait and lurk and let OTHER people beta test for MS or ANY developer, and we are equally cautious and wary about beta testing new software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards. And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or hard EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow advantageous to THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about this one for a minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's best interest, they want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT, they DO have their OWN interests in mind as I've said before, and if bundling all this stuff into an SP saves them support time and money, they will do it. Good luck on whatever you decide to do. > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in > message news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com... >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett" >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: >| >| > >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for >| > | 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary." >| > | >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.ms >| > | px >| > >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for >| > SP3. >| >| >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced >| no dates. Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" >| indicate that these are rough estimates, not promises. >| >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing >| an estimate is not. >| >| >| > And, they >| > always say it's preliminary ;-) >| >| >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that >| when the date is far enough in the future that they are >| unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date and feel >| assured of making it, *then* they will announce a date. >| >| >| -- >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup > > > -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Tom Willett Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? I don't disagree with you. I am not pushing for SP3, nor do I have a desire to be concerned about it until it's actually released. I was only pointing out that the release period can change, as they have done 2 or 3 times. It's all tentative. Tom "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message news:Xns998D623355D25ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... | Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du | jour ... | | > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing | > different tentative release periods. | | Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on God's | Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it has in it. | Quite the contrary, you should be wary and cautious to the point | of being frightened of the prospect if you intend to be an early | adopter. I am NOT saying that MS EVER intentionally screws up, | but they DO occasionally mess up a critical update or some other | update. Hopefully, by the time an SP is put together, they've | ascertained whatever the problem is and fixed it, or they may | have simply ignored it if the number of bad reports is small. | | As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not whacking | on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the burning need to | know a firm date. It isn't like you're going to drop dead of | cancer the next day if you don't download it and immediately | install it. Do what you think best, of course. As for me, and | many others, we will wait and lurk and let OTHER people beta test | for MS or ANY developer, and we are equally cautious and wary | about beta testing new software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards. | | And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or hard | EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow advantageous to | THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about this one for a | minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's best interest, they | want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT, they DO have their OWN | interests in mind as I've said before, and if bundling all this | stuff into an SP saves them support time and money, they will do | it. | | Good luck on whatever you decide to do. | | > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in | > message news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com... | >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett" | >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: | >| | >| > | >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message | >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... | >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned for | >| > | 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary." | >| > | | >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.ms | >| > | px | >| > | >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date for | >| > SP3. | >| | >| | >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have announced | >| no dates. Words like "preliminary" and "currently plan" | >| indicate that these are rough estimates, not promises. | >| | >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or | >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. Changing | >| an estimate is not. | >| | >| | >| > And, they | >| > always say it's preliminary ;-) | >| | >| | >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like that | >| when the date is far enough in the future that they are | >| unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date and feel | >| assured of making it, *then* they will announce a date. | >| | >| | >| -- | >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User | >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup | > | > | > | | | | -- | HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > I don't disagree with you. I am not pushing for SP3, nor do I > have a desire to be concerned about it until it's actually > released. > > I was only pointing out that the release period can change, as > they have done 2 or 3 times. It's all tentative. > > Tom OK, Tom. Forgive me if I sounded stident or obstructionist, it is just that I see so many people screw themselves into the ground needlessly with unverified updates. You are correct, the update date is tentative, and will be until it is announced - by definition, right? Look what happened to MS when they advertised last year that Vista would ship at Thanksgiving in time for the Christmas buying season. It was a major PR disaster for them to have to admit that THEY thought it was still too unstable to release, and they delayed it for some months. Don't think they intend to make that mistake again. Now, I am certain they DO advise their developer base as well as both private and public beta testers of the availability of beta builds of what will become SP3. And, Tom, I'm still curious. Why are you interested, perhaps to the point of worrying about it, exactly when MS decides to release? If your system is running fine now, and you've gotten all the updates to install correctly, why temp fate? Once again, these are the opinions of a wary old fool, YMMV. > "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message > news:Xns998D623355D25ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >| Tom Willett added these comments in the current discussion du >| jour ... >| >| > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site >| > showing different tentative release periods. >| >| Tom, please keep this in mind. First, there is NO reason on >| God's Green Earth to be lusting after SP3, no matter WHAT it >| has in it. Quite the contrary, you should be wary and >| cautious to the point of being frightened of the prospect if >| you intend to be an early adopter. I am NOT saying that MS >| EVER intentionally screws up, but they DO occasionally mess >| up a critical update or some other update. Hopefully, by the >| time an SP is put together, they've ascertained whatever the >| problem is and fixed it, or they may have simply ignored it >| if the number of bad reports is small. >| >| As to multiple dates on the web site, so what?! I'm not >| whacking on you, Tom, or anyone, but I just do not see the >| burning need to know a firm date. It isn't like you're going >| to drop dead of cancer the next day if you don't download it >| and immediately install it. Do what you think best, of >| course. As for me, and many others, we will wait and lurk and >| let OTHER people beta test for MS or ANY developer, and we >| are equally cautious and wary about beta testing new >| software, e.g., Vista, on our Visa cards. >| >| And, one more time, NO company selling ANY product soft or >| hard EVER pre-announces far out UNLESS it is somehow >| advantageous to THEM for PR or marketing reasons. Think about >| this one for a minute: making XP work better ain't in MS's >| best interest, they want you to buy a Vista upgrade. BUT, >| they DO have their OWN interests in mind as I've said before, >| and if bundling all this stuff into an SP saves them support >| time and money, they will do it. >| >| Good luck on whatever you decide to do. >| >| > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote >| > in message >| > news:ud94c3h24ic4il257u49pg9j1s6gflefj0@4ax.com... >| >| On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:00:05 -0500, "Tom Willett" >| >| <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: >| >| >| >| > >| >| > "ANONYMOUS" <ANONYMOUS@NEWSGROUPS.COM> wrote in message >| >| > news:46C20762.D9699D71@NEWSGROUPS.COM... >| >| > | "SP3 for Windows XP Professional is currently planned >| >| > | for 1H CY2008. This date is preliminary." >| >| > | >| >| > | http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks >| >| > | .ms px >| >| > >| >| > BTW, this is the third change MS has made to the date >| >| > for SP3. >| >| >| >| >| >| No, they have made *no* changes because they have >| >| announced no dates. Words like "preliminary" and >| >| "currently plan" indicate that these are rough estimates, >| >| not promises. >| >| >| >| If they announce a firm release date and then miss it, or >| >| change it, that's a failure to keep their promises. >| >| Changing an estimate is not. >| >| >| >| >| >| > And, they >| >| > always say it's preliminary ;-) >| >| >| >| >| >| Just like almost everyone else does, they use words like >| >| that when the date is far enough in the future that they >| >| are unsure of it. When they are closer to a release date >| >| and feel assured of making it, *then* they will announce a >| >| date. >| >| >| >| >| >| -- >| >| Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User >| >| Please Reply to the Newsgroup >| > >| > >| > >| >| >| >| -- >| HP, aka Jerry > > > -- HP, aka Jerry
Recommended Posts