Guest Tom Willett Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? I am *not* interested in it, and I'm *not* worrying about it. Period. I was simply pointing out that release dates *change*. I couldn't care less if they ever release the darn thing ;-) Tom | | 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
Guest Unknown Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an Operating System, not a printer driver. You appear to be emotional rather than objective. Could very well have been a virus? What was the solution? "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu... > 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 Unknown Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Totally understand. Bear in mind however that each release of a new operating system does so much more than the previous release. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message news:Xns998CCD244E44ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... > 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 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 am *not* interested in it, and I'm *not* worrying about it. > Period. I was simply pointing out that release dates > *change*. I couldn't care less if they ever release the darn > thing ;-) > OK! Don't get excited! If I may just make the observation, if you were as ambivalent as you say, why are you making such a (apparent) fuss over what is really a non-problem? I'm with your last, I really don't care when they release it, I'll wait anyway. Have a good week. As for me, I'm going to shoot car pictures this afternoon of the cars staging for the annual Woodward Dream Cruise and intend to forget this PC stuff for awhile. Incidently, Tom, one of our new vehicles was expected to be at dealers in May, maybe June, and hasn't shown up yet, which tells me that we're having an analogous problem to what MS had with Vista last year, some production hitch. If I were in the market for this vehicle, I'd probably be damn well pissed that I can't get it, but I would MUCH prefer Chrysler to find and fix whatever the productioon problems or parts shortages are than to have them ship potential crap, as we did like all the car makers until they got religion in the late 1980s/1990s that it ain't smart to destroy their rep by shipping less than the very best vehicles they can. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Unknown Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides you with security updates. Never gives you an update for a driver for example. I do my updates manually and on at least two occasions stopped a download that should NOT have been presented. "ben" <abc@efg.com> wrote in message news:e3nj67z3HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > 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? Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an > Operating System, not a printer driver. You appear to be > emotional rather than objective. Could very well have been a > virus? What was the solution? Agreed. In ANY technical issue, or even seemingly benign things like politics, I find it best to be the most factual and the least emotional I can be. I have strong opinions, demonstrably, but they are based on experience and not getting bent outta shape for a truly minor problem, yet blaming the entire thing on MS. Seems to me that I accused "student" of trolling all of us so he/she can get a good grade in some freshman computer science class instead of doing controlled testing and diagnostics, starting always with a comprehensive malware scan. "student" <guest@csus_.edu> > wrote in message news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >> 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 >>> >>> > > > -- 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 .... > Totally understand. Bear in mind however that each release of > a new operating system does so much more than the previous This is PRECISELY why I hold the view I do - because it IS bigger and far more complex. With Windows, since MS is obviously loathe to destroy people's ability to use older, legacy apps and HW, they must of necessity build every damn thing they've ever encountered into each new release. An easy example of this is the still annoying requirement not to use the old DOS wildcard characters and other special characters in a file name. Once they went to 255 char names, I think they should at least give users the option of turning that off if they know they're not running any "DOS" apps, which XP doesn't really support anyway, or even really old Win 3.1 8.3 file name apps. It is said that XP SP2 was an 80%+ rewrite, and I would imagine that Vista is not only an order of magnitude bigger and more complex, it is also a virtually 100% fresh-sheet-of-paper rewrite. That is always good, but carries it's own risks. But then, nothing in life is without risks, is it? Have a great day! > release. "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message > news:Xns998CCD244E44ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30... >> 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 > > > -- 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 .... > One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides > you with security updates. Never gives you an update for a > driver for example. I do my updates manually and on at least > two occasions stopped a download that should NOT have been > presented. Once again, this is my opinion and YMMV, but I vastly prefer to get drivers from the HW manufacturer if I can at all, unless there is some good reason to get them from MS. I've had too many printer drivers, mainly for HP printers, simply not work at all or not take advantage of the entire suite of features. Incidently, I NEVER recommend updating drivers just for the helluva-it! Way too much risk of destroying a working system if you don't have the previous version handy AND you get even get to your old files. I ONLY update drivers, of ANY/ALL kinds when I have a known problem or there is some major enhancement I lust after. And, honestly, I can't remember an example since I need a driver for my old wide-carriage HP 1220C for XP, which HP happily provided, as did MicroTek for my old Scanmaker 4 flatbed scanner. In both cases, the MS driver was a POS. "ben" <abc@efg.com> wrote in message > news:e3nj67z3HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> 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. > > > -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Ken Blake, MVP Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:19:44 -0500, "Tom Willett" <tompepper@mvps.invalid> wrote: > I'll rephrase it. They made changes to their web site showing different > tentative release periods. OK, thanks. I don't mean to give you a hard time over this, but there are many people (not necessarily you) who see things like your original post, and conclude that Microsoft has missed their scheduled dates, reneged on their promises, is late once again, etc. They simply don't understand the difference between an estimate and a promise. > > "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 > -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest student Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Why the warning when adding/updating a new driver that the driver is "not microsoft signed"?? why should the os care whether the vendor's drive has the ms signature & what is the purpose of the ms signature? As the file was on the windows server, the printout was done with another computer. The user gave up for the day & shutdown his computer; interestingly, after bootup the next day, he tried to print the same file & it got printed ok..... On 2007-08-15, Unknown <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an Operating System, > not a printer driver. You appear to be emotional rather than objective. > Could very well have been a virus? What was the solution? > "student" <guest@csus_.edu> wrote in message > news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >> 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 student Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Can't resist the comment about "getting a good grade" & trolling. I am a student, a "professional student", taking advantage of the programs for people over 60 that is available in the state university system & have read a few years back that such programs are available at about 40 states. Going back to school is wonderful & helps lessen some of the narrow-mindedness of ourselves in different areas, at least it is for me. My computer experience is admittedly old & dealing with mainframes; & then the xfer of data between the pc, tandem, dec & the mainframe. The pc's being used were as a substitute for dumb terminals & documentation until at the end where it was used for data collection. However, it does seem no one admits to being on either compuserve or genie isp's when microsoft had official support forums prior to selling the forum names to the windows user group in compuserve. I think that the absence of official ms support in the newsgroups evolved because ms would hear about too many bugs in the software where it would be difficult to sweep under the rug & not get paid for the "free support". On 2007-08-15, HEMI-Powered <none@none.sn> wrote: > Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour > ... > >> You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an >> Operating System, not a printer driver. You appear to be >> emotional rather than objective. Could very well have been a >> virus? What was the solution? > > Agreed. In ANY technical issue, or even seemingly benign things > like politics, I find it best to be the most factual and the > least emotional I can be. I have strong opinions, demonstrably, > but they are based on experience and not getting bent outta shape > for a truly minor problem, yet blaming the entire thing on MS. > > Seems to me that I accused "student" of trolling all of us so > he/she can get a good grade in some freshman computer science > class instead of doing controlled testing and diagnostics, > starting always with a comprehensive malware scan. > > "student" <guest@csus_.edu> >> wrote in message news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >>> 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 Ken Blake, MVP Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 00:03:28 -0000, "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote: > 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. Except for the trivial, there is absolutely no such thing as bug-free software. Any program of any complexity has bugs, and as the size and complexity rises, so does the number of bugs. Good software has relatively few bugs, has bugs that don't usually cause severe consequences, and has bugs that affect only relatively small numbers of people. No software is perfect. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest Ken Blake, MVP Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:53:32 -0500, student <guest@csus_.edu> 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. This is off-topic for this newsgroup as well as not pertinent to the thread you posted it too, but just a quick reply: When it comes to computerized grammar checking, the state of the art is primitive. It's not Microsoft Word that has the problem in particular, it's all such programs. I'm a WordPerfect user myself, and grammar checking is just as bad there. None of this is suitable for checking much more than simple sentences of the Dick and Jane variety, and I never use it myself. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest Robert Moir Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? "Laughingstar~*" <le_sentier_battunospam368@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:%23lQU5Jo3HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Exactly the reason I program my "Downloads" to be approved by this PC > owner--Moi! In a public discussion this week, more than 1/3 of those > present said they've bought IMacs b/c MS keeps coming out with new OS, et > al, and requiring its consumers to be their R&D. I agree. Its getting to > be exhausting. Wake up MS. I think those mac purchasers will be disappointed if they went there because of Microsoft releasing updates every month. The current version of Apple's "Tiger" release of OSX is 10.4.10. 10.4.11 is currently out for testing prior to general release. That's 10 or 11 major revisions, broadly equal to a service pack, since the release of 10.4.0. Apple run to at least one patch a month, often more. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking Apple here... I'm a Mac user myself as well as a Windows user and I actually prefer Apple's OS to Microsoft's one, but neither company gets it 100% right first time and has no need to issue updates. Neither do the Linux crowd.
Guest Robert Moir Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? "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? That isn't what "unknown" said at all.
Guest Uncle Grumpy Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: >One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides you with >security updates. Never gives you an update for a driver for example. AND THAT'S A GOOD THING! Never... NEVER get a driver update from Windows Update. NEVER
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? student added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > Can't resist the comment about "getting a good grade" & > trolling. > > I am a student, a "professional student", taking advantage of > the programs for people over 60 that is available in the state > university system & have read a few years back that such > programs are available at about 40 states. Going back to > school is wonderful & helps lessen some of the > narrow-mindedness of ourselves in different areas, at least it > is for me. There's no such thing as a "professional student" unless you just enjoy the pain of studying for the helluva it. But, yes, you did troll us by pleading for help in a naive way without telling the truth about what you were trying to accomplish, which is why I whacked you. If you're going to be a pro student, then you'd best learn how to do independent study of both printed and web/Usenet- based literature and not try to con more experienced people into doing your homework for you. That is ineffective in learning as well as rude. > My computer experience is admittedly old & dealing with > mainframes; & then the xfer of data between the pc, tandem, > dec & the mainframe. The pc's being used were as a substitute > for dumb terminals & documentation until at the end where it > was used for data collection. > > However, it does seem no one admits to being on either > compuserve or genie isp's when microsoft had official support > forums prior to selling the forum names to the windows user > group in compuserve. I think that the absence of official ms > support in the newsgroups evolved because ms would hear about > too many bugs in the software where it would be difficult to > sweep under the rug & not get paid for the "free support". I go back the the Comuserve days and I DID research the various manufacturer's libraries, whatever they were called. Today, I go directly to a manufacturer's web site or at least Google for an answer. I only come to a support NG, this one or anyone, when I've completely failed to find mention of my problem and I've exhausted all attempts even after Googling my brains out. Besides what I learned about learning in engineering school, which I described to you in detail, I learned how to learn on my diverse job assignments from rookie engineer to Senior Manager, by taking classes, seminars, reading, and later, Internet research. And, I GENTLY worked with those more knowledgeble than me to learn, but NEVER just blindly hit them up for a solution because /I/ wanted to figure it out on my own. When other people do your work for you, and my daughter used to try to con me into that through her entire 16 years of formal education, you really do fail to grasp what is happening. Eistein said it best: "Insanity is doing the same things and expecting a different outcome." Get on the stick, learn the best methods for you to learn whatever a pro student wants to, and go for it. I have had a philsophy since my youth that I believe can be summed up this way: learning is a lifetime endeavor. Today, besides Googling, for non-technical things, I haunt cable news and the more factual cable channels, but THEN /I/ verify the new information on my own to decide if it is truth or fiction. Works well, give it a try. > On 2007-08-15, HEMI-Powered <none@none.sn> wrote: >> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du >> jour ... >> >>> You need to get some facts straightened out. Windows is an >>> Operating System, not a printer driver. You appear to be >>> emotional rather than objective. Could very well have been a >>> virus? What was the solution? >> >> Agreed. In ANY technical issue, or even seemingly benign >> things like politics, I find it best to be the most factual >> and the least emotional I can be. I have strong opinions, >> demonstrably, but they are based on experience and not >> getting bent outta shape for a truly minor problem, yet >> blaming the entire thing on MS. >> >> Seems to me that I accused "student" of trolling all of us so >> he/she can get a good grade in some freshman computer science >> class instead of doing controlled testing and diagnostics, >> starting always with a comprehensive malware scan. >> >> "student" <guest@csus_.edu> >>> wrote in message >>> news:slrnfc4o5s.403.guest@crane.li-po.edu... >>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Ken Blake, MVP added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > Except for the trivial, there is absolutely no such thing as > bug-free software. Any program of any complexity has bugs, and > as the size and complexity rises, so does the number of bugs. > > Good software has relatively few bugs, has bugs that don't > usually cause severe consequences, and has bugs that affect > only relatively small numbers of people. No software is > perfect. > During the very earliest days of digital computing, mathematicians helping the programmers developed quantitative measures to estimate and predict the likelihood of bugs depending on the complexity of the job. That branch of math is far, far more sophisticated today, as you obviously know, Ken. Modern development is on such a large scale that no one understands even a fraction of the full range of the project so teamwork and computerized testing are the norm, such as automated regression testing to verify that all or the vast majority of past bugs do not reappear and new side-effects bugs don't crop up. Still, as you say, there simply is no such thing as bug-free, often not even any real guarantee of stability. On something as large as XP or Vista, and even with the thousands of pieces of HW and SW that MS maintains for testing, and despite hundreds of thousands of various kinds of beta testing, it is indeed a challenge for them to produce good code. Despite mine or other's views that MS could do better, I do not at all think they are so stupid or greedy as to intentionally kite the testing and release prematurely. They showed good judgment and restraint by delaying Vista, for example, when it was discovered that it did not meet internal standards for quality. Now, having puffed up my friends in Redmond, maintaining support for legacy HW and SW going back all the way to DOS is a major impediment to getting bug-free code these days. It is a tough job, and probably doomed to failure. However, I generally agree with your assessment that the number of people grievously affected tends to be small. By analogy to people's private lives it has been said that "when your neighbor is laid off, it is a recession but when you are laid off, it is a depression", meaning that if you are of even a small percentage of affected users of some major or even minor failure, it begins to almost instantly loom totally out-of- control as you more and more desperately search for a solution. I've been there, done that, and have never been really that complimentary to MS, but DO understand their frustrations. -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Robert Moir added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > > "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? > > That isn't what "unknown" said at all. > MS is never responsible for mistakes made by other developers, SO LONG AS the developers are kept well into the loop so that they're aware of upcoming changes and warned of what the independent developers must do to be compatible with a major release of Windows. But, many people, certainly me, have legacy apps back to 98 or early XP that are no longer available or the user does not like or cannot afford to upgrade all of their apps and utilities. THIS is where the real problems come from. They expect one brand of Windows and were tested for it, but have no clue how an SP or 2 or a major rewrite like Vista might affect them, hence they fail either minorly or disastrously. Ditto for HW drivers and other crucial systems software for legacy HW. It is this, coupled with not wanting to beta test with my Visa card, that causes me to delay upgrading to major new releases until I am confident that the major issues have at least been identified and I can evaluate the likelihood of a major outtage. Some say I am a Luddite and overly cautious, but it has saved me much grief. I waited over a year for SP2 and only had one hiccup, which turned out to be a failure of the old Roxio 5 optical burning utility not being compatible. That one took me 6 months to resolve because I could not identify what was causing it until a techie, my nephew, asked me the simple question "do you think a driver may be at fault somewhere?" Sure enough! Deleted the errant drive and bought Roxio 8, end of problem. So, I will not go to Vista until my next PC, as I want one with far more memory and more CPU than even the good system I have today, I want others to debug Vista for me for a year, and I WILL be OK then. I'm sorry to have to say this, and it is hardly limited to MS, but I simply cannot fathom the mad rush so many people have to be early adopters ANY new SW or O/S. I used to be that way but discovered that I was spending more time beating my system into working than I was using it for useful tasks. That happened mid- 1995, and I simply stopped my own mad rush to always have the latest. Since then, I have been far, far more stable. So, it is doubtful I will ever go to SP3 because their are critical updates that will be in it that I declined to install because I lurked on these support NGs and discovered problems that I strongly suspected would affect me. That's my decision, f course, and others enjoy the freedom and the right to upgrade when - or if- they choose to. Thanks to listening and have a great day! -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Uncle Grumpy added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... > "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote: > >>One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides >>you with security updates. Never gives you an update for a >>driver for example. > > AND THAT'S A GOOD THING! > > Never... NEVER get a driver update from Windows Update. > > NEVER > I SO STRONGLY AGREE THAT IT IS DIFFICULT NOT TO BE SO STRIDENT AS TO POST IN ALL CAPS! ALWAYS, ALWAYS, /ALWAYS/ GET DRIVERS FROM THE HW MANUFACTURER IF THEY HAVE THEM! -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest Bogey Man Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net... > One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides you with > security updates. Never gives you an update for a driver for example. I do > my updates manually and on at least two occasions stopped a download that > should NOT have been presented. I would never let MS update automatically update any driver for hardware. Get the updates from the manufacturer of the equipment.
Guest Unknown Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? I never automatically update anything. But when I do a manual update I carefully read what it applies to and then do it. Never had a problem. NVIDIA video driver is a classic example. I will say, there are some I refuse to download and install. "Bogey Man" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message news:O3PF$qA4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message > news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net... >> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only provides you with >> security updates. Never gives you an update for a driver for example. I >> do my updates manually and on at least two occasions stopped a download >> that should NOT have been presented. > > I would never let MS update automatically update any driver for hardware. > Get the updates from the manufacturer of the equipment.
Guest Ken Blake, MVP Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:10:51 -0000, "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote: > Despite mine or other's views that MS could > do better, I do not at all think they are so stupid or greedy as > to intentionally kite the testing and release prematurely. They > showed good judgment and restraint by delaying Vista, for > example, when it was discovered that it did not meet internal > standards for quality. I think we are very close to complete agreement on all of this. I wanted to add just one more comment. Yes, of course Microsoft could do better. Every software developer could do better. If they tested longer and released later, they would have better code. But that's always true. Take that to its logical conclusion and you test forever (because there are *always* more bugs to be found), and nothing ever gets released. So what happens whenever a company has software being tested? The marketing people want to get it out the door sooner and say "it's good enough," and the QA people say "no it's not ready yet." Ultimately management has to strike a balance, decide who to believe, and decide when to release it. Some companies clearly do a much better job of balancing these factors than others do. In my view Microsoft does at least as good as job of this as most companies do. But it's always important to remember that the decision is always a compromise, and the software can never be perfect. Didn't you and I have a very similar discussion on this very subject a while back? -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Ken Blake, MVP added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... >> Despite mine or other's views that MS could >> do better, I do not at all think they are so stupid or greedy >> as to intentionally kite the testing and release prematurely. >> They showed good judgment and restraint by delaying Vista, >> for example, when it was discovered that it did not meet >> internal standards for quality. > > I think we are very close to complete agreement on all of > this. I wanted to add just one more comment. > > Yes, of course Microsoft could do better. Every software > developer could do better. If they tested longer and released > later, they would have better code. > > But that's always true. Take that to its logical conclusion > and you test forever (because there are *always* more bugs to > be found), and nothing ever gets released. Ken, I cannot think of ANY company in ANY market segment of ANY economy, whether it be PC-related, services, home products, the car biz, anything at all that is either a "soft" or "hard" product that cannot do better. That is the nature of humans and a stark reality of the brutal competition going on in a globalized econometric model. So, the question isn't that MS or Adobe or Corel or anybody couldn't do better and shouldn't strive to do better, it is a fact of life in corporate America today, and also in off-shore companies competing here, that they much be ever more diligent to ensure the proper balance between benefits and risks of ANYthing they do and a proper balance between the cost of improving whatever it is they sell against the real or even perceived improvement by the customer. And, whether we like it or not, product cycles are dropping like a rock as all the SW and HW companies accelerate their efforts to generate both new sales and upgrade revenue. All this adds up to hiccups along the way. Again, I do not, not NOT think that ANY company, certainly not MS, that would EVER intentionally harm its customer base. That is the fastest way to a bad rep that can be devastatingly costly in both the short- and long-run. > So what happens whenever a company has software being tested? > The marketing people want to get it out the door sooner and > say "it's good enough," and the QA people say "no it's not > ready yet." Ultimately management has to strike a balance, > decide who to believe, and decide when to release it. Some > companies clearly do a much better job of balancing these > factors than others do. In my view Microsoft does at least as > good as job of this as most companies do. But it's always > important to remember that the decision is always a > compromise, and the software can never be perfect. Precisely. In my world of cars, albeit I am now retired, we face the exact same pressures. We MUST improve quality against fierce global competitors but we MUST also lower prices, again to meet competition, primarily from Asia, principly China coming on strong. And, engineers, analgously to software developers, NEVER think it is good enough while Sales and Marketing weanies NEVER think they are fast enough. As a play on words with real estate, it is balance, balance, balance in these mutually exclusive criteria. > Didn't you and I have a very similar discussion on this very > subject a while back? > Yes. And, I think we've BOTH come a long, long way in toning down our rhetoric, which I certainly appreciate from you and the other MVPs. I suppose you and I, and the others in this thread, could say "same church, different pew" this time around, but the basic notion is NEVER resolved because the upgrade du jour is constantly changing, this time it is SP3, not long ago it was Vista. And, new people come in with new or even the same frustrations that have never engaged in the discussion before. To put it in a nutshell, if ALL of us, and that sure as hell includes me!, would stay factual and avoid emotional or hysterican responses or stereotypical notions, we'll all do much better. Agree with that? -- HP, aka Jerry
Guest HEMI-Powered Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Re: XP SP3 Details? Bogey Man added these comments in the current discussion du jour .... > "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message > news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net... >> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only >> provides you with security updates. Never gives you an update >> for a driver for example. I do my updates manually and on at >> least two occasions stopped a download that should NOT have >> been presented. > > I would never let MS update automatically update any driver > for hardware. Get the updates from the manufacturer of the > equipment. > Again, I cannot overemphasize my stong agreement with your statement. Even far more than a MS or other SW general upgrade, IMO, the biggest single cause of major PC system blowdowns is an errant driver. And, while the manufacturers do release buggy drivers, they have the advantage of knowing more than anyone how their HW works as well as being able to maintain trade secrets that they will not release to MS. -- HP, aka Jerry
Recommended Posts