;-)
My linux comment was a bit flippant I grant you, though commercially I think
it holds.
The real crux of my comment was, I suppose, to do with the synchronicity of
releases: OS, drivers, software. I have seen posts on these forums for a
large number of complaints accompanied by various bits of (non-specific, give
this a try, if that doens' work try this) voodoo to try and get round them.
And while there are some issues to do with 3rd parties, I cannot, especially
given Microsoft's past, believe that they are ALL 3rd party problems. My
problems with Vista were such that, after the complete waste of a weekend
trying to get it to stay up and running for more than 5 minutes, I have to
now spend the rest of the week re-installing all my software on my, now
reformatted and XP'd, hard drive.
If you're machine falls in, what appears to be, a narrow hardware spec then
you are relatively fine. Similarly, if all you want to do is office and web
surfing then you should be fine. It just seems that it (and this includes
available support from others) isn't ready as a proper PC workstation yet.

Ian
BTW the iMac is just from my name - I am not the user of a Fisher Price
Adult play centre and never have been ;-)

"Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User" wrote:

Ian

I have cut the part I like best in your statement..

"if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
Linux."

That is about as true as Rudi's remarks if your screen name is anything to
go by..

Vista is perfectly stable, and the appearance of SP1 will not make older HP
printers (or any hardware that manufacturers no longer have a desire to
support) work with Vista, anymore than it will make some XP specific
programs run..

Program and hardware issues will have to be directed at the makers now or in
the future..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two of my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working. I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two of my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working. I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work well on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft product. To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the extreme. If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed, there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many more.

Ian


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two of my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working. I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

You would do well to look at Mac history of releasing bug ridden stuff.. it
hasn't been published much because the reader base would have been so
small..

Many OS upgrades fail because the upgrader has failed to run upgrade
advisors, failed to read instructions.. we all know that there is not one
piece of software out there that doesn't have at least one issue, but many
of the issues encountered are a result of user incompetence and ignorance..
I do not use the word ignorance maliciously here.. it is ignorance born out
of not reading instructions or not asking when not sure what to do..

To come in here as you do is pointless.. the ironic part is that your
favorite company has changed it's architecture to run Microsoft OS.. in
fact, it may have even been you that made the remark re using Vista on a Mac
is more reliable than running it on its native IBM clone base.. this in
itself is an admission that it is not so much the OS but the hardware that
is the problem.. MS don't make the hardware, so by the standard, it can't be
the fault of the OS.. and if you think about it, Mac OSx is written for
specific hardware and still craps out, where the expectation is that Windows
will run on anything cobbled together by an 8 yr old on the kitchen table..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed, there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many more.

Ian


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti
Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote
instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the
respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only
that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this
software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new
features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two of
my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as
you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by
people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working. I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

Ahh, I see why you have immediately jumped on your hobby horse...it's the
handle ;-)
Did you not read my post? Actually you don't have to answer that - it's
obvious from your rant.

Firstly, lets get it out of the way - from my previous reply to you:
"BTW the iMac is just from my name - I am not the user of a Fisher Price
Adult play centre and never have been ;-) " Translated this means I do not,
nor have I ever, owned a Mac.
Secondly, your Mac rant is only relevant in that it highlights the problems
in shipping a new OS and getting it right first time. I made no comparison,
or mention of, Macs. And I certainly did not mention anything about Vista on
a Mac as you claimed.
Furthermore, to suggest that, because MS does not make the hardware that the
OS can't be at fault is incredible. You are aware that an OS runs on
hardware? And that hardware vendors provide information about how and in what
ways their hardware can be used? And that OS writers take that information
and write code that uses that hardware, and runs on it and crazy stuff like
that? Many so-called hardware issues are down to the software running on them
- and that is not just external 3rd party drivers.

You and your friend above seem to have jumped on to your kettle drums
because of my handle but you have to do betther than this. I am on here as a
Windows user trying to get some useful information - not mantras. Come on
guys, is this it? We all know that some users struggle more than others but
there are people on here with real issues they want answers to - not a party
line.
Of course some issues will be drivers, some will be users, and some vendors,
but some will be the OS - this is inevitable and anyone who has written
anything more than a hello world program will know that to get such a huge
beast out the door and right first time is practically impossible. Hence, we
are already seeing updates and we will see many more.
Rudi's original post (many moons ago now) was perfectly sensible from his
experience. It may not be that Vista is "full of bugs" but the claims from
Jupiter that it is all 3rd parties fault is just as, if not more, unlikely.

Ian

"Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User" wrote:

You would do well to look at Mac history of releasing bug ridden stuff.. it
hasn't been published much because the reader base would have been so
small..

Many OS upgrades fail because the upgrader has failed to run upgrade
advisors, failed to read instructions.. we all know that there is not one
piece of software out there that doesn't have at least one issue, but many
of the issues encountered are a result of user incompetence and ignorance..
I do not use the word ignorance maliciously here.. it is ignorance born out
of not reading instructions or not asking when not sure what to do..

To come in here as you do is pointless.. the ironic part is that your
favorite company has changed it's architecture to run Microsoft OS.. in
fact, it may have even been you that made the remark re using Vista on a Mac
is more reliable than running it on its native IBM clone base.. this in
itself is an admission that it is not so much the OS but the hardware that
is the problem.. MS don't make the hardware, so by the standard, it can't be
the fault of the OS.. and if you think about it, Mac OSx is written for
specific hardware and still craps out, where the expectation is that Windows
will run on anything cobbled together by an 8 yr old on the kitchen table..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed, there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many more.

Ian


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti
Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote
instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the
respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only
that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this
software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new
features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two of
my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as
you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by
people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working. I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

"I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying"
NO, it is not.
I am looking at the differences.
My hardware works.
What is the difference between hardware that works and hardware that does
not?
You seem to say the operating system, but that is the commonality.
Search for the differences in the systems for the reasons indifferent
performance.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed, there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many more.

Ian

Change your name if you want no association with Macs in a computer
newsgroup, and please learn basic comprehension.. you have twisted
statements in order that they become arguments.. I didn't claim anything, I
suggested..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, I see why you have immediately jumped on your hobby horse...it's the
handle ;-)
Did you not read my post? Actually you don't have to answer that - it's
obvious from your rant.

Firstly, lets get it out of the way - from my previous reply to you:
"BTW the iMac is just from my name - I am not the user of a Fisher Price
Adult play centre and never have been ;-) " Translated this means I do
not,
nor have I ever, owned a Mac.
Secondly, your Mac rant is only relevant in that it highlights the
problems
in shipping a new OS and getting it right first time. I made no
comparison,
or mention of, Macs. And I certainly did not mention anything about Vista
on
a Mac as you claimed.
Furthermore, to suggest that, because MS does not make the hardware that
the
OS can't be at fault is incredible. You are aware that an OS runs on
hardware? And that hardware vendors provide information about how and in
what
ways their hardware can be used? And that OS writers take that information
and write code that uses that hardware, and runs on it and crazy stuff
like
that? Many so-called hardware issues are down to the software running on
them
- and that is not just external 3rd party drivers.

You and your friend above seem to have jumped on to your kettle drums
because of my handle but you have to do betther than this. I am on here as
a
Windows user trying to get some useful information - not mantras. Come on
guys, is this it? We all know that some users struggle more than others
but
there are people on here with real issues they want answers to - not a
party
line.
Of course some issues will be drivers, some will be users, and some
vendors,
but some will be the OS - this is inevitable and anyone who has written
anything more than a hello world program will know that to get such a huge
beast out the door and right first time is practically impossible. Hence,
we
are already seeing updates and we will see many more.
Rudi's original post (many moons ago now) was perfectly sensible from his
experience. It may not be that Vista is "full of bugs" but the claims from
Jupiter that it is all 3rd parties fault is just as, if not more,
unlikely.

Ian

"Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User" wrote:

You would do well to look at Mac history of releasing bug ridden stuff..
it
hasn't been published much because the reader base would have been so
small..

Many OS upgrades fail because the upgrader has failed to run upgrade
advisors, failed to read instructions.. we all know that there is not one
piece of software out there that doesn't have at least one issue, but
many
of the issues encountered are a result of user incompetence and
ignorance..
I do not use the word ignorance maliciously here.. it is ignorance born
out
of not reading instructions or not asking when not sure what to do..

To come in here as you do is pointless.. the ironic part is that your
favorite company has changed it's architecture to run Microsoft OS.. in
fact, it may have even been you that made the remark re using Vista on a
Mac
is more reliable than running it on its native IBM clone base.. this in
itself is an admission that it is not so much the OS but the hardware
that
is the problem.. MS don't make the hardware, so by the standard, it can't
be
the fault of the OS.. and if you think about it, Mac OSx is written for
specific hardware and still craps out, where the expectation is that
Windows
will run on anything cobbled together by an 8 yr old on the kitchen
table..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work
well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will
find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence
would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include
the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your
part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft
product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the
extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed,
there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many
more.

Ian


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti
Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote
instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the
respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only
that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this
software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth
the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new
features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they
do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two
of
my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as
you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by
people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working.
I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

It's ironic that you state that:
"Many OS upgrades fail because the upgrader has failed to run upgrade
advisors, failed to read instructions.. we all know that there is not one
piece of software out there that doesn't have at least one issue, but many
of the issues encountered are a result of user incompetence and ignorance..
I do not use the word ignorance maliciously here.. it is ignorance born out
of not reading instructions or not asking when not sure what to do.. "

then assume I'm a Mac user becaues of my name when it is clear in my post I
am not - is that the kind of not reading instruction ignorance to which you
refer? I don't know what you 2 are being paid for being defenders of the
faith but based on your answers, it's too much.

I'm sure there are others out there with a basic computing knowledge that
will give a better return.

You talk of comprehension but are sorely lacking in it. In future, try
reading the posts before jumping to conclusions and showing your hand too
early.

"Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User" wrote:

Change your name if you want no association with Macs in a computer
newsgroup, and please learn basic comprehension.. you have twisted
statements in order that they become arguments.. I didn't claim anything, I
suggested..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, I see why you have immediately jumped on your hobby horse...it's the
handle ;-)
Did you not read my post? Actually you don't have to answer that - it's
obvious from your rant.

Firstly, lets get it out of the way - from my previous reply to you:
"BTW the iMac is just from my name - I am not the user of a Fisher Price
Adult play centre and never have been ;-) " Translated this means I do
not,
nor have I ever, owned a Mac.
Secondly, your Mac rant is only relevant in that it highlights the
problems
in shipping a new OS and getting it right first time. I made no
comparison,
or mention of, Macs. And I certainly did not mention anything about Vista
on
a Mac as you claimed.
Furthermore, to suggest that, because MS does not make the hardware that
the
OS can't be at fault is incredible. You are aware that an OS runs on
hardware? And that hardware vendors provide information about how and in
what
ways their hardware can be used? And that OS writers take that information
and write code that uses that hardware, and runs on it and crazy stuff
like
that? Many so-called hardware issues are down to the software running on
them
- and that is not just external 3rd party drivers.

You and your friend above seem to have jumped on to your kettle drums
because of my handle but you have to do betther than this. I am on here as
a
Windows user trying to get some useful information - not mantras. Come on
guys, is this it? We all know that some users struggle more than others
but
there are people on here with real issues they want answers to - not a
party
line.
Of course some issues will be drivers, some will be users, and some
vendors,
but some will be the OS - this is inevitable and anyone who has written
anything more than a hello world program will know that to get such a huge
beast out the door and right first time is practically impossible. Hence,
we
are already seeing updates and we will see many more.
Rudi's original post (many moons ago now) was perfectly sensible from his
experience. It may not be that Vista is "full of bugs" but the claims from
Jupiter that it is all 3rd parties fault is just as, if not more,
unlikely.

Ian

"Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User" wrote:

You would do well to look at Mac history of releasing bug ridden stuff..
it
hasn't been published much because the reader base would have been so
small..

Many OS upgrades fail because the upgrader has failed to run upgrade
advisors, failed to read instructions.. we all know that there is not one
piece of software out there that doesn't have at least one issue, but
many
of the issues encountered are a result of user incompetence and
ignorance..
I do not use the word ignorance maliciously here.. it is ignorance born
out
of not reading instructions or not asking when not sure what to do..

To come in here as you do is pointless.. the ironic part is that your
favorite company has changed it's architecture to run Microsoft OS.. in
fact, it may have even been you that made the remark re using Vista on a
Mac
is more reliable than running it on its native IBM clone base.. this in
itself is an admission that it is not so much the OS but the hardware
that
is the problem.. MS don't make the hardware, so by the standard, it can't
be
the fault of the OS.. and if you think about it, Mac OSx is written for
specific hardware and still craps out, where the expectation is that
Windows
will run on anything cobbled together by an 8 yr old on the kitchen
table..


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work
well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will
find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence
would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include
the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your
part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft
product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the
extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed,
there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many
more.

Ian


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"so it is everyone elses fault"
I never said any such thing.
However it may seem that way with narrow thinking and/or an anti
Microsoft
agenda.

The fact is Vista works well on my computers.
You can not dispute that fact so you attempt to distort what I wrote
instead
of dealing with the actual issue.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Ahh, so it is everyone elses fault. Do you work for Microsoft by any
chance ;-)
I've gone back to XP as vista is too unstable (even though the
respective
shoddy driver-writing departments have issued new drivers). not only
that,
but some of my installed software wouldn't run. Admittedly, this
software
was
not written for vista but until everyone catches up it's not worth
the
pain.
I like the look of it and there seem to be some interesting new
features
but
if I wanted an OS that not enough people support yet, I'd stick with
linux.

All the best
Ian

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time."
Vista is stable now.
If it is not stable for you ask your hardware manufacturer why they
do
not
update your drivers.
If you have software issues, contact the software manufacturers.

Vista RTM has been stable and reliable for over two months on two
of
my
computers so your blanket statement clearly is not as applicable as
you
suggest.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Rudi Brochs" wrote in message
...
Windows Vista is full of bugs still, and should NOT be used by
people
who
needs a stable system.

Also there are to much hardware, and software that is'nt working.
I
advice
everyone to wait for SP1.

I doubt it will be stable enough for a long time.

And yes, I have tried it!

RB

A PC is not a closed system and any OS made available for that market should
cater for the different types of hardware that may be availble. Ironically,
your mate's comments about the Mac actually, almost, become relevant here -
because that is more of a closed system. To say that an OS is stable for a PC
environment based on running on a particular processor on a particular
motherboard with a particular graphics card and memory (without, it seems,
any USB devices attached) is spurious in the extreme. Keep taking the money
and banging the drum. I am sure your handlers are very proud.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

"I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying"
NO, it is not.
I am looking at the differences.
My hardware works.
What is the difference between hardware that works and hardware that does
not?
You seem to say the operating system, but that is the commonality.
Search for the differences in the systems for the reasons indifferent
performance.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
Eh,
"Vista is stable now. If it is not stable for you ask your hardware
manufacturer why they do not update your drivers. If you have software
issues, contact the software manufacturers. "

I'm afraid that is exactly what you are saying - no distortion. You are
assuming that every hardware and software fault is a 3rd party problem
based
on the fact that Vista runs on your computers. Vista may indeed work well
on
your computers but if you take a browse through these forums you will find
that this is not universally the case.
Furthermore, I'm afraid the narrow thinking is your own. Your statement
above completely rules microsoft out of any possible reasons for faults
with
people's machines - you can't get much narrower than that. Prudence would
dictate that, a problem weighed against a several million line code OS
versus
a couple of hundred line driver, would cause you to AT LEAST include the
possibility that there could be an OS issue - No?

Lastly, this is not microsoft bashing - more narrow thinking on your part
again. This is a forum for Visat issues and Vista is a microsoft product.
To
believe that an OS of this size and complexity is going to hit the mark
without problems first time (for general release) is naive in the extreme.
If
you cast your mind back to every release of every OS anyone has ever
produced
you will find that there were, to varying degrees, problems. Indeed, there
are already many updates to Vista available and there will be many more.

Ian

"without, it seems, any USB devices attached"
The most obvious and FALSE assumption you have made about my computers.
How could you possibly come to that conclusion?
Not from anything I said about my computers.

If you would read the posts in this newsgroup as well as others you will see
mine are not the only computers working well with vista.
To add to that mine are far from new.

For some reason you can not accept the fact Vista works and can work well.
You seem to assume that problems for one are indicative of all.
I do not assume all computers work with Vista because I know that can never
be true and that applies to any operating system from any source.

Go ahead and count the number of computers in the world that have Vista or
attempted to install Vista.
Now look at how many are identical.
There is nearly an infinite number of possible hardware combinations.

Then you bring in the ridiculous Mac comparison of your again.
ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT when referring to Vista compatibility with various
hardware.

"Keep taking the money..."
Now you feel the need to insult with this irrelevant comment.
A sure sign you lack the confidence or ability to make your own point.
I suggest you leave that to others more capable.
There are those who share your view but are capable and confident and they
have no need to prop up their position with such irrelevant rubbish,

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"iMac" wrote in message
...
A PC is not a closed system and any OS made available for that market
should
cater for the different types of hardware that may be availble.
Ironically,
your mate's comments about the Mac actually, almost, become relevant
here -
because that is more of a closed system. To say that an OS is stable for a
PC
environment based on running on a particular processor on a particular
motherboard with a particular graphics card and memory (without, it seems,
any USB devices attached) is spurious in the extreme. Keep taking the
money
and banging the drum. I am sure your handlers are very proud.