Vista Sevice Packs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dermot
  • Start date Start date
Robert Barnett wrote:

> Vista is still cr@p and always will be. Microsoft as usual designed
> for the idiots in the world instead of real user's.


Not so. Vista is for those who know that one does not use an apostrophe
with a plural.

Paddy
 
On Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:07 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:02:00 -0700, Dermot
><Dermot@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>Can anyone tell me the truth about Vista sevice packs:
>>1. How may are there.
>>2. Is it true that installing them leads to more problems than before
>>installing them?
>> (Feedback from searchibng the internet)
>>
>>Thanks in advance

>
>
>Unlike Apple which uses a "closed" hardware system thereby controlling
>development much more strictly, the PC world to it's credit uses a
>"open" system where there is a army of hardware manufacturers each
> Snip ....................


PC = Personal computer = Apple, Amiga, Windows based, Commodore 64
etc. etc.

Why have you Windows freaks hijacked the term?

--
Alto
NSW Australia
 
Dermot wrote:
> Can anyone tell me the truth about Vista sevice packs:
> 1. How may are there.


Just 1.

> 2. Is it true that installing them leads to more problems than before
> installing them?


Not on any machine I've seen, but a few (a statistically insignificant
number, unless you happen to be one of them) people have reported some
problems.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:59:39 +1000, Alto <alto@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:07 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:02:00 -0700, Dermot
>><Dermot@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Can anyone tell me the truth about Vista sevice packs:
>>>1. How may are there.
>>>2. Is it true that installing them leads to more problems than before
>>>installing them?
>>> (Feedback from searchibng the internet)
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance

>>
>>
>>Unlike Apple which uses a "closed" hardware system thereby controlling
>>development much more strictly, the PC world to it's credit uses a
>>"open" system where there is a army of hardware manufacturers each
>> Snip ....................

>
>PC = Personal computer = Apple, Amiga, Windows based, Commodore 64
>etc. etc.
>
>Why have you Windows freaks hijacked the term?


What century are you living in? Commodore 64, Amiga?

Besides, I didn't coin the term. Understand yet?

I guess not.
 
On Fri, 30 May 2008 21:21:00 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:59:39 +1000, Alto <alto@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:07 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:02:00 -0700, Dermot
>>><Dermot@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Can anyone tell me the truth about Vista sevice packs:
>>>>1. How may are there.
>>>>2. Is it true that installing them leads to more problems than before
>>>>installing them?
>>>> (Feedback from searchibng the internet)
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance
>>>
>>>
>>>Unlike Apple which uses a "closed" hardware system thereby controlling
>>>development much more strictly, the PC world to it's credit uses a
>>>"open" system where there is a army of hardware manufacturers each
>>> Snip ....................

>>
>>PC = Personal computer = Apple, Amiga, Windows based, Commodore 64
>>etc. etc.
>>
>>Why have you Windows freaks hijacked the term?

>
>What century are you living in? Commodore 64, Amiga?
>
>Besides, I didn't coin the term. Understand yet?
>
>I guess not.


Its not a matter of what century we are living in - the mention of
those computers was to emphasise that PC has been used for all sorts
of computer for a long time - going back to at least the 1980s.

So do YOU understand yet??


--
Alto
NSW Australia
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 12:46:06 +1000, Alto <alto@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 30 May 2008 21:21:00 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 31 May 2008 09:59:39 +1000, Alto <alto@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:07 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:02:00 -0700, Dermot
>>>><Dermot@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Can anyone tell me the truth about Vista sevice packs:
>>>>>1. How may are there.
>>>>>2. Is it true that installing them leads to more problems than before
>>>>>installing them?
>>>>> (Feedback from searchibng the internet)
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks in advance
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Unlike Apple which uses a "closed" hardware system thereby controlling
>>>>development much more strictly, the PC world to it's credit uses a
>>>>"open" system where there is a army of hardware manufacturers each
>>>> Snip ....................
>>>
>>>PC = Personal computer = Apple, Amiga, Windows based, Commodore 64
>>>etc. etc.
>>>
>>>Why have you Windows freaks hijacked the term?

>>
>>What century are you living in? Commodore 64, Amiga?
>>
>>Besides, I didn't coin the term. Understand yet?
>>
>>I guess not.

>
>Its not a matter of what century we are living in - the mention of
>those computers was to emphasise that PC has been used for all sorts
>of computer for a long time - going back to at least the 1980s.
>
>So do YOU understand yet??


I understand you're trying to pick a fight. Sorry, not interested, I
simply hit people over the head with FACTS, then they usually crawl
away with their tail between their legs after getting embarrassed,
unless their name is Frank, who doesn't have enough sense to do that.

Your memory of events seems flawed. Let me help you out.

The term PC, short for personal computer, is a reference to IBM's
first personal computer. While the term personal computer has been
tossed around and sometimes applied to anything not Apple, the terms
PC and PC world which is what I used is correctly reserved when
talking about IBM's personal computer and all the clones that shortly
followed.

In 1982 Time Magazine did something it never did before. Instead of
naming a man of the year they acknowledged IBM's achievement by
breaking tradition and choosing the PC (personal computer) as their
"Man of the Year." This in large part is why the term "PC" stuck and
ever since has been known to be meant as a reference to personal
computers roughly following IBM's design.

If you were laboring under some other illusion you're wrong, but it
seems you're too pigheaded to admit it. I get a lot of that. <snicker>

For your further education The Commodore 64 was NEVER referred to as a
PC but formally was known as a Commodore Business Machines Model
number 64 or Commodore 64 for short. The Amiga was never known as a PC
either. In fact the name Amiga means roughly a friend of the female
sex in both Spanish and Portuguese. Since it was marketed by Amiga
Corp., it didn't hurt that Amiga alphabetically appears ahead of Apple
and Atari.
 
Alto wrote:
>
>
> Its not a matter of what century we are living in - the mention of
> those computers was to emphasise that PC has been used for all sorts
> of computer for a long time - going back to at least the 1980s.
>




In the strictest original, technical meaning of the term "personal
computer," you're perfectly correct. Those were all "personal computers."

However, living languages, such as the English used in this news group,
evolve over time, and the meanings of commonly used words and terms
inevitably take on new usages and meanings. For instance, when was the
last time you actually "dialed" a telephone? Even Apple's own Marketing
department has narrowed the "definition" to based an entire advertising
campaign on "PC vs. Mac."


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
 
On Fri, 30 May 2008 22:23:55 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> Snip ....................


>For your further education The Commodore 64 was NEVER referred to as a
>PC but formally was known as a Commodore Business Machines Model
>number 64 or Commodore 64 for short. The Amiga was never known as a PC
>either. In fact the name Amiga means roughly a friend of the female
>sex in both Spanish and Portuguese. Since it was marketed by Amiga
>Corp., it didn't hurt that Amiga alphabetically appears ahead of Apple
>and Atari.



My my, sticking your neck out there!! NEVER referred to as a PC???
Have you not researched this?!!

A quick Google for "Commodore 64" "personal computer" will show
hundreds of references to the Commodore 64, and other Commodore and
Amiga computers as "Personal Computer" such as:-

"The Commodore team put together the first self-contained
personal computer which they called the "Personal
Electronic Transactior," or PET. The PET was announced
in 1976"
http://www.pc-history.org/comm.htm

".............. Commodore 64--which may be the best-selling
personal computer of all time........."

http://news.cnet.com/The-man-behind-the-Commodore-64/2008-1042_3-6222406.html

In the early 1980s Commodore 64 had about 40% of the
Personal Computer, about twice that of the IBM PC
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/total-share.ars/10

"A personal computer series introduced in 1985 by
Commodore. Amigas gained a reputation ............"
http://www.answers.com/topic/amiga?cat=technology

and hundreds more - too many to list.

--
Alto
NSW Australia
 
On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 08:30:15 +1000, Alto <alto@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 30 May 2008 22:23:55 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
>
>> Snip ....................

>
>>For your further education The Commodore 64 was NEVER referred to as a
>>PC but formally was known as a or Commodore 64 for short. The Amiga was never known as a PC
>>either. In fact the name Amiga means roughly a friend of the female
>>sex in both Spanish and Portuguese. Since it was marketed by Amiga
>>Corp., it didn't hurt that Amiga alphabetically appears ahead of Apple
>>and Atari.

>
>
>My my, sticking your neck out there!! NEVER referred to as a PC???
>Have you not researched this?!!


Lets see just what you're "arguing" about. The creator of the
Commodore 64 referred to it as Commodore Business Machines Model
number 64. What you or anyone else call it is totally irrelevant and
like you being dumb enough to insist a apple is like a orange because
they're both round.

You don't know your history. The term PC started with IBM's personal
computer to separate it from Apple's version. If you or some other
ding dong now want to retroactively change history to include other
makes that weren't know as a PC WHEN INTRODUCED be my guest if it
makes you happy. I got better things to do with my time.
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 08:44:38 -0600, Bruce Chambers
<bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote:

>Alto wrote:
>>
>>
>> Its not a matter of what century we are living in - the mention of
>> those computers was to emphasise that PC has been used for all sorts
>> of computer for a long time - going back to at least the 1980s.
>>

>
>
>
> In the strictest original, technical meaning of the term "personal
>computer," you're perfectly correct. Those were all "personal computers."
>
> However, living languages, such as the English used in this news group,
>evolve over time, and the meanings of commonly used words and terms
>inevitably take on new usages and meanings. For instance, when was the
>last time you actually "dialed" a telephone? Even Apple's own Marketing
>department has narrowed the "definition" to based an entire advertising
>campaign on "PC vs. Mac."


Maybe it is becoming common usage but many still correctly use
"Personal Computer" to include all types. for example:-

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/technology/22apple.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer

and many more
--
Alto
NSW Australia
 
Hi Robert
Thanks for the reply
What would you consider "Real User" requirements?

"Robert Barnett" wrote:

> There is only SP1. I have had it installed since it was released and while
> it doesn't fix the stuff I hate about Vista I have had fewer technical
> issues. Like it works better with my three monitors and two video cards. I
> have less trouble with it forgetting the resolution on my 30" screen.
>
> Vista is still cr@p and always will be. Microsoft as usual designed for the
> idiots in the world instead of real user's.
>
>
 
Hi Paddy
Thanks for the reply.
What do you consider are the advantages of Vista?

"Paddy" wrote:

> Robert Barnett wrote:
>
> > Vista is still cr@p and always will be. Microsoft as usual designed
> > for the idiots in the world instead of real user's.

>
> Not so. Vista is for those who know that one does not use an apostrophe
> with a plural.
>
> Paddy
>
>
>
 
On Sat, 31 May 2008 17:49:58 -0500, Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:
> Snip ....................


>You don't know your history. The term PC started with IBM's personal
>computer to separate it from Apple's version. If you or some other
>ding dong now want to retroactively change history to include other
>makes that weren't know as a PC WHEN INTRODUCED be my guest if it
>makes you happy. I got better things to do with my time.


Nobody is arguing as to WHEN the PC term came into being. What is a
FACT that "Personal Computer" has been used to describe ALL types of
personal computers, not just IBM, for many a long year.
--
Alto
NSW Australia
 
Back
Top