Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

why!

 

Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

zero.

 

Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

 

It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

 

The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

times faster.

 

WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

 

Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

know how to fix it.

The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

rant about.

 

HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GHz%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

 

BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

 

--

Carey Frisch

Microsoft MVP

Windows Shell/User

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"Adam Albright" wrote:

 

Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

why!

 

Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

zero.

 

Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

 

It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

 

The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

times faster.

 

WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

 

Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

know how to fix it.

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

> rant about.

>

> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=

 

1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GH

 

z%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>

> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

 

One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

not have to buy one from HP.

 

--

Alias

To email me, remove shoes

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:47:24 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

<cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>rant about.

 

I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

 

I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

my own systems for over a decade.

 

To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

moved in under two minutes.

 

Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

 

So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

they don't have a clue.

 

Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

 

The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

 

My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:57:11 +0200, Alias <iamalias@shoesgmail.com>

wrote:

>Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

>> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>> rant about.

>>

>> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

>> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=

>

>1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GH

>

>z%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>>

>> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>>

>

>One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

>not have to buy one from HP.

 

 

MVP = Most voted pinhead

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Adam Albright wrote:

> Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

> why!

>

> Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

> constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

> external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

> suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

> Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

> and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

> now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

> Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

> in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

> under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

> the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

> are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

> zero.

>

> Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

>

> It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

> progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

> shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

> to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

> minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

> hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

> seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

> anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

> hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

>

> The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

> called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

> Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

> this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

> transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

> times faster.

>

> WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

>

> Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

> know how to fix it.

>

hehehe...you STILL can't get your one and only in place upgrade (on

idiots do that!) of Vista business to run correctly...mr genius...mr

know-it-all...mr computer expert...lol!

You're just fraud, a fake, a phony and a real idiot loser.

hahaha...how stupid can one moron be?

Frank

Give me a break. NOT a problem with hardware. It has happend to me and my

hardware is just fine. Just because you haven't experienced the problem

doesn't mean squat.

It's the lame Vista that is having problems. How on earth did you come up

with that explanation, being an MVP?

 

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23ckueMZ6HHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

> rant about.

>

> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GHz%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>

> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

> --

> Carey Frisch

> Microsoft MVP

> Windows Shell/User

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> "Adam Albright" wrote:

>

> Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

> why!

>

> Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

> constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

> external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

> suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

> Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

> and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

> now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

> Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

> in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

> under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

> the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

> are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

> zero.

>

> Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

>

> It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

> progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

> shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

> to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

> minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

> hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

> seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

> anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

> hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

>

> The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

> called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

> Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

> this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

> transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

> times faster.

>

> WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

>

> Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

> know how to fix it.

>

And another thing. Buying an HP computer. Being an MVP, you should know

better. That goes for Compaq also.

 

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message

news:%23ckueMZ6HHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

> rant about.

>

> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GHz%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>

> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

> --

> Carey Frisch

> Microsoft MVP

> Windows Shell/User

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> "Adam Albright" wrote:

>

> Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

> why!

>

> Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

> constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

> external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

> suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

> Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

> and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

> now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

> Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

> in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

> under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

> the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

> are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

> zero.

>

> Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

>

> It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

> progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

> shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

> to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

> minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

> hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

> seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

> anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

> hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

>

> The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

> called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

> Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

> this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

> transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

> times faster.

>

> WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

>

> Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

> know how to fix it.

>

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:08:59 -0700, Frank <fb@nospan.crm> wrote:

 

>> WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

>>

>> Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

>> know how to fix it.

>>

>hehehe...you STILL can't get your one and only in place upgrade (on

>idiots do that!) of Vista business to run correctly...mr genius...mr

>know-it-all...mr computer expert...lol!

>You're just fraud, a fake, a phony and a real idiot loser.

>hahaha...how stupid can one moron be?

>Frank

 

Kiss this Frank:

 

http://www.magicalrabbit.com/ebay/Dog_Doo_a.jpg

Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

> and install at least 2GB RAM.

 

So that's your suggestion? Wonder if the other Wintards around here get as

large an allowance from their mommies as you obviously do?

 

Cheers.

 

 

--

Remove Vista Activation Completely ...

http://tinyurl.com/2w8qqo

 

Intelligent and helpful Windoze error messages: http://tinyurl.com/2ks5dz

 

Coming Soon! Ubuntu 7.10 ... New Features:

http://lunapark6.com/ubuntu-gutsy-gibbon-710-new-features.html

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Alias wrote:

> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

> not have to buy one from HP.

>

 

Why is that?

Frank

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:57:11 +0200, Alias <iamalias@shoesgmail.com>

> wrote:

>

>

>>Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

>>

>>>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>>rant about.

>>>

>>>HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

>>>http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=

>>

>>1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GH

>>

>>z%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>>

>>>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>>>

>>

>>One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

>>not have to buy one from HP.

>

>

>

> MVP = Most voted pinhead

>

hehehe...exposed your stupid incompetent arse...lol!

Frank

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:47:24 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>rant about.

>

>

> I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

> an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

> web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

> regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

> they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

>

> I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

> times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

> have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

> my own systems for over a decade.

>

> To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

> repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

> prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

> moved in under two minutes.

>

> Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

>

> So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

> they don't have a clue.

>

> Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>

>

>>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

>

> The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

> sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

> much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

>

> My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

>

Oh, you cannot accept the awful truth can you, you drunken moron

loser...lol!

Frank

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

news:pkk8d3pmrtfuefu002ja2laaqql5rtm1lg@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:47:24 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>

>>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>rant about.

>

> I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

> an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

> web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

> regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

> they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

>

> I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

> times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

> have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

> my own systems for over a decade.

>

> To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

> repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

> prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

> moved in under two minutes.

>

> Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

>

> So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

> they don't have a clue.

>

> Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>

>>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

> The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

> sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

> much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

>

> My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

>

 

Maybe you should have your computer checked out by someone who knows what

they are doing.

I'm sure they will be able to fix your problem.

Alias wrote:

> Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

>> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>> rant about.

>>

>> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

>> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=

>

> 1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GH

>

> z%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>>

>> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>>

>

> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

> not have to buy one from HP.

>

And why would one think that? You don't think that the Most Valuable Player

award is given out to someone because they know something about computers,

do you?

 

Cheers.

 

--

Remove Vista Activation Completely ...

http://tinyurl.com/2w8qqo

 

Intelligent and helpful Windoze error messages: http://tinyurl.com/2ks5dz

 

Coming Soon! Ubuntu 7.10 ... New Features:

http://lunapark6.com/ubuntu-gutsy-gibbon-710-new-features.html

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer

>> and not have to buy one from HP.

>>

>

> Why is that?

> Frank

 

Own an HP do you? Or do you go for Dells?

 

LOL!

 

Oh, and if you have to ask, you'll never know.

 

--

Alias

To email me, remove shoes

Re: Why Vists is sometimes no more useful than a pile of wet dogcrap

 

NoStop wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:

>>> The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>> I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>> and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>> and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>> rant about.

>>>

>>> HP Pavilion a1748x Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2.0 GHz Desktop - Refurbished

>>> http://www.pcmall.com/pcmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=7263850&Redir=

>> 1&description=HP-Pavilion%20a1748x%20Athlon%2064%20X2%203800+%202.0%20GH

>>

>> z%20Desktop%20-%20Refurbished-Desktop%20Computers

>>> BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>> that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>> Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>> with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>>>

>> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

>> not have to buy one from HP.

>>

> And why would one think that? You don't think that the Most Valuable Player

> award is given out to someone because they know something about computers,

> do you?

>

> Cheers.

>

 

Good point. Carey is living proof of that.

 

--

Alias

To email me, remove shoes

Adam,

 

I too had the same problems that you describe but after I installed the KB

patches my Vista system runs considerably better (about the minute and a

half you mentioned for file transfer). Accordingly, it would seem that for

some reason my Vista system works better with the patches whereas yours does

not. Since we are both running Vista then the results suggest that the

problem may be hardware related. I will carry out some tests (type of

processor, processor/GPU combinations, amount of memory etc) to see if I can

pin down where the problem might be.

 

 

 

"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message

news:tth8d3t1i3vqujvqs4l1df877222h61ptq@4ax.com...

> Because it is badly flawed and prone to give bogus information, that's

> why!

>

> Take the following example. I move small batches of video files

> constantly. Sometimes between various internal drives, other times to

> external drives. I installed the so-called KB "patches" that is

> suppose to address slow file transfers. The bottom line, sometimes

> Vista is reasonably fast with them, other times it is inexcusably slow

> and so damn stupid in what it reports that it is laughable. Like just

> now. I tried to move six lousy files, totaling just under 3.5 GB.

> Normally at most this should take about a minute and a half to maybe

> in extreme cases two minutes to move to a USB 2.0 external drive even

> under the worst conditions. This drive was already "spun up" none of

> the files were "in use" elsewhere, I was doing nothing else, so there

> are simply no excuses for such miserable poor performance. None, nada,

> zero.

>

> Well lets see how fuc*ed up Vista really is...

>

> It starts out, I click on the show more details option to monitor

> progress. The time remaining calculation starts climbing. First it

> shows 5 minutes, (twice as long as it should take) then rapidly goes

> to absurd estimates, first reporting 12 hours, then 23 hours and five

> minutes, still climbing, gets to two days and 19 hours. Almost 68

> hours to move 3.5 GB! Over the course of an actual 5 minutes and 16

> seconds it really took to move these files dumb as dirt Vista showed

> anything from 15 hours remaining to once briefly showing 4 days and 6

> hours with it jumping all over the place in between.

>

> The idiots of Redmond should be so damn ashamed of this pile of crap

> called Vista that they never show their faces in public even again.

> Microsoft should be laughed out of the software industry for releasing

> this kind of garbage. These simply is no damn excuse for file

> transfers to take this long when every other shell you can get is many

> times faster.

>

> WHY THE HELL DOESN'T MICROSOFT FIX THEIR CRAP?

>

> Maybe the real answer is they simply don't have the programmers that

> know how to fix it.

>

"Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message

news:fb1k57$h0l$5@aioe.org...

>

> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

> not have to buy one from HP.

 

Well to be fair, I know how to build a PC but sometimes it's more time

effective to buy one.

 

Having said that, the breadth and depth of ignorance shown by Carey in these

groups is astonishing at times. Makes me glad I'm no longer a MVP to be

honest. Fancy advising people to throw a computer away rather than fix the

problems with it.

"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:CWYAi.100983$rX4.61799@pd7urf2no...

>>

> And why would one think that? You don't think that the Most Valuable

> Player

> award is given out to someone because they know something about computers,

> do you?

 

It used to be. In some areas it still is.

I just transferred a 4.3 GB folder back and forth from

my Vista desktop to a USB external drive. Each transfer

took approximately 35 seconds.

 

I believe your issue is hardware related...possibly

a bad cable. See the following:

 

Vista finally stable for me, (no) thanks to a cable!

http://dmoisan.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!95CB015E3E4A702A!229.entry

 

--

Carey Frisch

Microsoft MVP

Windows Shell/User

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"Adam Albright"wrote:

 

>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>rant about.

 

I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

 

I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

my own systems for over a decade.

 

To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

moved in under two minutes.

 

Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

 

So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

they don't have a clue.

 

Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

 

The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

 

My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

Not a clue - Just FYI

 

Whooptie - Doooo. You transfered files back and forth. How about the

thousands who have problems doing that? Putting your head in the sand

doesn't mean there is not a problem. Maybe you should put your {MVP} plaque

up for auction on Ebay. Don't forget your laminated membership card.

 

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message

news:Owq8ouZ6HHA.1148@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>I just transferred a 4.3 GB folder back and forth from

> my Vista desktop to a USB external drive. Each transfer

> took approximately 35 seconds.

>

> I believe your issue is hardware related...possibly

> a bad cable. See the following:

>

> Vista finally stable for me, (no) thanks to a cable!

> http://dmoisan.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!95CB015E3E4A702A!229.entry

>

> --

> Carey Frisch

> Microsoft MVP

> Windows Shell/User

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> "Adam Albright"wrote:

>

>

>>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>rant about.

>

> I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

> an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

> web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

> regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

> they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

>

> I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

> times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

> have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

> my own systems for over a decade.

>

> To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

> repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

> prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

> moved in under two minutes.

>

> Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

>

> So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

> they don't have a clue.

>

> Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>

>>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>

> The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

> sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

> much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

>

> My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

>

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:09:16 -0700, "Bill Yanaire" <bill@yanaire.com>

wrote:

>Give me a break. NOT a problem with hardware. It has happend to me and my

>hardware is just fine. Just because you haven't experienced the problem

>doesn't mean squat.

> It's the lame Vista that is having problems. How on earth did you come up

>with that explanation, being an MVP?

 

It's a riot to me how irresponsibly your typical MVP conducts himself

in this newsgroup out of what appears to be a bad case of misplaced

loyalty to Microsoft.

 

It seems an requirement of becoming a MVP that you must agree to put

blinders on and just ignore real world events. Vista screws up file

transfers bad sometimes, yet even when many MVPs have admitted in this

group they won't use the Windows shell themselves, they still say it

is a hardware issue? Laughable! They must think the rest of us have

short memories. Just pretend it's somebody's hardware or at least

trout that out as the excuse and hope it goes away.

 

Microsoft shoots itself in the foot marking countless Vista installs

as counterfeit, just say the problem is now fixed rather then condemn

Microsoft for being so damn stupid that they couldn't get a server

back up and running for 17 hours and just let millions of people

suffer the result of their mismanagement.

 

There is NO accountability in Microsoftland, THAT is the number one

problem. You build a corporation on greed and arrogance, that's the

result.

 

That is reflected in this newsgroup with both fanboys and MVPs

marching in lockstep wearing rose colored glasses and willingly always

blindly singing the praises of Microsoft. I find it moronic that

nearly every MVP and obviously the idiot fanboys like Frankie numbnuts

are always willing to wait in line to crawl up Microsoft's butt issue

after issue even when it is plain as the nose on your face Microsoft

screwed something up. Such blind devotion is usually reserved for

religious zealots, political hacks and assorted terrorist groups.

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:22:43 -0700, Frank <fb@nospan.crm> wrote:

>Alias wrote:

>

>> One would think that an MVP would know how to build his own computer and

>> not have to buy one from HP.

>>

>

>Why is that?

 

They pretend to be "expert" so geez, they can't master a Phillips

screwdriver to assemble a freaking PC which takes maybe 20 minutes

tops?

 

Heck ten year old kids "build" their own computers.

 

ROTFLMAO!

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:24:23 -0700, Frank <fb@nospan.crm> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:

>

>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:47:24 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>The problem is with your hardware, not Windows Vista.

>>>I suggest you purchase a new computer with Vista preinstalled

>>>and install at least 2GB RAM. I have the following computer

>>>and have not experienced any of the issues you constantly

>>>rant about.

>>

>>

>> I suggest you actually learn something about computers before you make

>> an ass of yourself again. This problem is very well documented on the

>> web, happens to people all over the world, of all experience levels,

>> regardless if they have a new computer with Vista pre installed, if

>> they did a clean install of Vista or a did an install in place.

>>

>> I've used the same drives for nine months, changed nothing and they at

>> times work fine, then other times out of the blue do what I said. I

>> have 2 GB of RAM (totally immaterial to this problem) and I've build

>> my own systems for over a decade.

>>

>> To prove to some pompous windbag like you it isn't the drives, I

>> repeated the move of the same exact files using first the command

>> prompt then again using two other shells and each time the files were

>> moved in under two minutes.

>>

>> Conclusion: It HAS to be Vista's half-ass GUI messed up interface.

>>

>> So as usual, another MVP shooting off his mouth and getting proved

>> they don't have a clue.

>>

>> Any more smart ass comment you want to make Mr. know nothing MVP?

>>

>>

>>>BTW, this "refurbished" HP computer is "brand new". The only thing

>>>that was refurbished is the BIOS. It was updated to be optimized for

>>>Vista's extraordinary performance. I have not had one single problem

>>>with this machine. Total cost with 2GB RAM: $450 + Tax & shipping.

>>

>>

>> The moronic "I've not had one single problem with this machine" is a

>> sure sign of some Bozo that never really pushes his computer to do

>> much of anything. Thanks for confirming you're in that camp.

>>

>> My advice, if you don't have a solution, just shut the fu*k up!

>>

>Oh, you cannot accept the awful truth can you, you drunken moron

>loser...lol!

>Frank

 

You want the truth? Carey Frisch was trying to bluff. You on the other

hard are a true blue complete jackass and are truly stupid.