In article <2ucg93hdkbvgk671t8khuug3v4ng1j2eqk@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:15:20 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

> >In article <8fdf9316763ebf4aps24dct9v949rlbuka@4ax.com>,

> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> >

> >

> >> That isn't the point. You buy something, especially a product that has

> >> been around for over 21 years, you expect the damn thing to WORK.

> >

> >Vista has been around for 21 years?

>

> Windows has. Wake up dummy.

 

But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

 

Wake up, dummy.

 

Mike

In article <5tcg939kfkaro4h2ns6b4724r0ucpf2c8d@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:13:16 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

> >In article <l2af93t35c1jqn0satd891jj96v4fohbn2@4ax.com>,

> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> >

> >> It just doesn't work. Not even for simple jobs.

> >

> >"Another" reason? What was the first reason?

> >

> >Mike

>

> You mean the first couple dozen?

 

Sure, since I haven't seen any yet.

 

Mike

In article <s6dg939tti9hu4mlin6pnn7tkbdiskts9g@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> Actually it was tested at 170.

 

Sure it is. That's why your posts here are moronic.

>Maybe that's why I could afford to

> retire in my early 40's which was about 20 years ago. You should be as

> smart. -)

 

Living in your parent's basement is not "retired".

 

Mike

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:38:16 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article <2ucg93hdkbvgk671t8khuug3v4ng1j2eqk@4ax.com>,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:15:20 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>>

>> >In article <8fdf9316763ebf4aps24dct9v949rlbuka@4ax.com>,

>> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>> >

>> >

>> >> That isn't the point. You buy something, especially a product that has

>> >> been around for over 21 years, you expect the damn thing to WORK.

>> >

>> >Vista has been around for 21 years?

>>

>> Windows has. Wake up dummy.

>

>But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

>1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

>common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>

>Wake up, dummy.

>

>Mike

 

Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:38:38 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article <5tcg939kfkaro4h2ns6b4724r0ucpf2c8d@4ax.com>,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:13:16 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>>

>> >In article <l2af93t35c1jqn0satd891jj96v4fohbn2@4ax.com>,

>> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>> >

>> >> It just doesn't work. Not even for simple jobs.

>> >

>> >"Another" reason? What was the first reason?

>> >

>> >Mike

>>

>> You mean the first couple dozen?

>

>Sure, since I haven't seen any yet.

>

>Mike

 

UAC would be another. Now pretend there is nothing wrong with it's

implementation.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:40:13 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article <s6dg939tti9hu4mlin6pnn7tkbdiskts9g@4ax.com>,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> Actually it was tested at 170.

>

>Sure it is. That's why your posts here are moronic.

>

>>Maybe that's why I could afford to

>> retire in my early 40's which was about 20 years ago. You should be as

>> smart. -)

>

>Living in your parent's basement is not "retired".

>

>Mike

 

Do I detect jealousy?

In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> >But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

> >1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

> >common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

> >

> >Wake up, dummy.

> >

> >Mike

>

> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

 

So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And you

call *me* clueless!?!?

 

Mike

In article <13eg93pgp88ro2lp8hdipflal38ir10aoe@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:38:38 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

> >In article <5tcg939kfkaro4h2ns6b4724r0ucpf2c8d@4ax.com>,

> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> >

> >> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:13:16 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

> >>

> >> >In article <l2af93t35c1jqn0satd891jj96v4fohbn2@4ax.com>,

> >> > Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> >> >

> >> >> It just doesn't work. Not even for simple jobs.

> >> >

> >> >"Another" reason? What was the first reason?

> >> >

> >> >Mike

> >>

> >> You mean the first couple dozen?

> >

> >Sure, since I haven't seen any yet.

> >

> >Mike

>

> UAC would be another. Now pretend there is nothing wrong with it's

> implementation.

 

I turn it off. It's a good idea for the clueless (like you appear to

be), but I don't see anything "wrong with it's implementation".

 

Please, enlighten us all with your "170 IQ" rantings.

 

Mike

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> >But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

>> >1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

>> >common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>> >

>> >Wake up, dummy.

>> >

>> >Mike

>>

>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>

>So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And you

>call *me* clueless!?!?

>

>Mike

 

Little has changed in the routine for copying/moving/deleting files

which is the subject we're discussing. Do try to pay better attention

and you'll avoid looking so dumb.

In article ,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

> Do I detect jealousy?

 

Why would I be jealous of your parent's basement? I have my own

basement.

 

Mike

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> >But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

>> >1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

>> >common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>> >

>> >Wake up, dummy.

>> >

>> >Mike

>>

>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>

>So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And you

>call *me* clueless!?!?

>

>Mike

 

Nice strawman attempt. That's about the limit of your intelligence.

 

Actually I'm in good company. People that actually KNOW something

about Windows unlike the dopes that hang out here throwing rocks from

the bushes.

 

Take John C. Dvorak for example.

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2123848,00.asp

 

Who's John? Oh he just authored or co-authored a dozen books, is a

award winning columnist for magazines like PC Magazine, Mac User,

Forbes, Barrens, writes for the New York Times and Los Angeles Times,

others major newspapers and magazines.

 

What have you done Mikey besides getting fall down drunk on the

weekends and shooting your mouth off in this backwater newsgroup?

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:49:13 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

 

>> >> You mean the first couple dozen?

>> >

>> >Sure, since I haven't seen any yet.

>> >

>> >Mike

>>

>> UAC would be another. Now pretend there is nothing wrong with it's

>> implementation.

>

>I turn it off.

 

So you claim to know all about something you just admitted you turned

off. Classic dummy response.

>It's a good idea for the clueless (like you appear to

>be), but I don't see anything "wrong with it's implementation".

 

Because you're too stupid to know would be my guess. <snicker>

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:51:26 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>In article ,

> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>

>> Do I detect jealousy?

>

>Why would I be jealous of your parent's basement? I have my own

>basement.

 

Feeble doesn't come close do describing your lame attempts.

 

Since you're so worried about where I live my home has 12 rooms, is a

little under 4,000 square feet in the far suburbs of a major city, has

a market value of over $500,000, which I paid cash for, and yesterday

when the stock market rose almost three hundred points I made more

money that day then you'll probably make all year.

 

Any more questions kid?

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:30:35 -0500, "GO"

<aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>Adam Albright wrote:

>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>>

>>> In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

>>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>>> But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with

>>>>> Windows

>>>>> 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have

>>>>> much in common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>>>>>

>>>>> Wake up, dummy.

>>>>>

>>>>> Mike

>>>>

>>>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>>>

>>> So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And

>>> you call *me* clueless!?!?

>>>

>>> Mike

>>

>> Little has changed in the routine for copying/moving/deleting files

>> which is the subject we're discussing. Do try to pay better attention

>> and you'll avoid looking so dumb.

>

>LOL! Good one! If nothing else this group is good for a laugh every now

>and then. :)

>

The only reason I hang around is to get a few laughs from Bozos like

Frank and Mike. I miss Justin too. Whatever happened to that phony?

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

>> In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>

>>>> But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with

>>>> Windows

>>>> 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have

>>>> much in common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>>>>

>>>> Wake up, dummy.

>>>>

>>>> Mike

>>>

>>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>>

>> So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And

>> you call *me* clueless!?!?

>>

>> Mike

>

> Little has changed in the routine for copying/moving/deleting files

> which is the subject we're discussing. Do try to pay better attention

> and you'll avoid looking so dumb.

 

LOL! Good one! If nothing else this group is good for a laugh every now

and then. :)

You may hate it today but you'll work through it... and you'll figure

out how to get around the problem. If you walk away and go to something

else it'll be like you "failed." That's why we're all here... we refuse

to "give up" and go back to XP or use what is 2nd best.

 

 

--

The Sand

 

God is my "back up." :)

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:30:35 -0500, "GO"

> <aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>

>> Adam Albright wrote:

>>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>>>

>>>> In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

>>>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>>> But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with

>>>>>> Windows

>>>>>> 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have

>>>>>> much in common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Wake up, dummy.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Mike

>>>>>

>>>>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the

>>>>> regulars.

>>>>

>>>> So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And

>>>> you call *me* clueless!?!?

>>>>

>>>> Mike

>>>

>>> Little has changed in the routine for copying/moving/deleting files

>>> which is the subject we're discussing. Do try to pay better

>>> attention and you'll avoid looking so dumb.

>>

>> LOL! Good one! If nothing else this group is good for a laugh

>> every now and then. :)

>>

> The only reason I hang around is to get a few laughs from Bozos like

> Frank and Mike. I miss Justin too. Whatever happened to that phony?

 

All three are new to me, although I have had a couple run-ins with Frank.

It's definitely amusing jabbing the zealots from time to time but it never

ceases to amaze me at how defensive these people get over legitimate

problems. I'm guessing MS must be paying them off or something )

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:52:26 -0700, "Telstar" <none@none> wrote:

>

>

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

>>news:dc2g939gba9o0ea6e4ok8i6spfkep4roue@4ax.com...

>>

>>>On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 19:09:32 -0400, "Richard Urban"

>>><richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>It doesn't. I brought it in.

>>>>

>>>>I am just saying that because something needs updates it doesn't mean it

>>>>is

>>>>not ready for distribution - any software product, operating system or

>>>>program.

>>>

>>>That's such a feeble excuse. It isn't like copying/moving/deleting

>>>files is a "new" feature to Windows. Worse, it is a core feature any

>>>OS handles easily... except for Windows of course. Leave it to

>>>Microsoft to mess up something as simple as deleting a group of files.

>>>

>>>A upgrade which is what Vista is, should build on what was already

>>>working in earlier versions of Windows. For reasons unknown Microsoft

>>>seems to have a bad habit of having features get worse over time.

>>>Classic example is Media Player. When Microsoft first introduced it

>>>Media Player was a no frills little applet that didn't do anything but

>>>play media files. Now it has a lot of bells and whistles but often

>>>crashes trying to do it's main function... play media files. Makes no

>>>sense to me.

>>>

>>

>>You clearly have an IQ of 80.

>

>

> Actually it was tested at 170. Maybe that's why I could afford to

> retire in my early 40's which was about 20 years ago. You should be as

> smart. -)

>

>

I too am Mensa, which as it turns out is meaningless in terms of life’s

achievements.

Boasting about one's iq score is considered to be the cult of

braggadocio, or one who employs vain and empty boasting but is actually

a cowardly and boastful man.

Never confuse education with intelligence or intelligence with

achievement and always be thankful of your hard work and the luck you

had in achieving your goals.

Frank

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:51:26 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

>

>>In article ,

>>Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Do I detect jealousy?

>>

>>Why would I be jealous of your parent's basement? I have my own

>>basement.

>

>

> Feeble doesn't come close do describing your lame attempts.

>

> Since you're so worried about where I live my home has 12 rooms, is a

> little under 4,000 square feet in the far suburbs of a major city, has

> a market value of over $500,000, which I paid cash for, and yesterday

> when the stock market rose almost three hundred points I made more

> money that day then you'll probably make all year.

>

> Any more questions kid?

>

Big deal!

A $500,000 house would put you in the ghetto where I live.

Frank

"Frank" <fb@nospamm.cmm> wrote in message

news:eRDMgbdxHHA.3784@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:52:26 -0700, "Telstar" <none@none> wrote:

>

>

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

>>news:dc2g939gba9o0ea6e4ok8i6spfkep4roue@4ax.com...

>>

>>>On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 19:09:32 -0400, "Richard Urban"

>>><richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>It doesn't. I brought it in.

>>>>

>>>>I am just saying that because something needs updates it doesn't mean it

>>>>is

>>>>not ready for distribution - any software product, operating system or

>>>>program.

>>>

>>>That's such a feeble excuse. It isn't like copying/moving/deleting

>>>files is a "new" feature to Windows. Worse, it is a core feature any

>>>OS handles easily... except for Windows of course. Leave it to

>>>Microsoft to mess up something as simple as deleting a group of files.

>>>

>>>A upgrade which is what Vista is, should build on what was already

>>>working in earlier versions of Windows. For reasons unknown Microsoft

>>>seems to have a bad habit of having features get worse over time.

>>>Classic example is Media Player. When Microsoft first introduced it

>>>Media Player was a no frills little applet that didn't do anything but

>>>play media files. Now it has a lot of bells and whistles but often

>>>crashes trying to do it's main function... play media files. Makes no

>>>sense to me.

>>>

>>

>>You clearly have an IQ of 80.

>

>

> Actually it was tested at 170. Maybe that's why I could afford to

> retire in my early 40's which was about 20 years ago. You should be as

> smart. -)

>

I too am Mensa, which as it turns out is meaningless in terms of life’s

achievements.

Boasting about one's iq score is considered to be the cult of

braggadocio, or one who employs vain and empty boasting but is actually

a cowardly and boastful man.

Never confuse education with intelligence or intelligence with

achievement and always be thankful of your hard work and the luck you

had in achieving your goals.

Frank

 

 

Interesting that this recieves no response...

 

This is one of the things I like about your posts, Frank. When it comes to

the nitty-gritty, you "civilize" and do not trivialize. Bravo!

 

Lang

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

news:5ffg93pklgnhrrm8rhr3k6qgh59d8hlas5@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:51:26 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

>>In article ,

>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>

>>> Do I detect jealousy?

>>

>>Why would I be jealous of your parent's basement? I have my own

>>basement.

>

> Feeble doesn't come close do describing your lame attempts.

>

> Since you're so worried about where I live my home has 12 rooms, is a

> little under 4,000 square feet in the far suburbs of a major city, has

> a market value of over $500,000, which I paid cash for, and yesterday

> when the stock market rose almost three hundred points I made more

> money that day then you'll probably make all year.

>

> Any more questions kid?

 

Do Alias a favour.

Lend, or even give, him enough pesetas to buy a copy of Vista.

* Adam Albright:

> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>

>> In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>

>>>> But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with Windows

>>>> 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

>>>> common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>>>>

>>>> Wake up, dummy.

>>>>

>>>> Mike

>>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>> So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And you

>> call *me* clueless!?!?

>>

>> Mike

>

> Nice strawman attempt. That's about the limit of your intelligence.

>

> Actually I'm in good company. People that actually KNOW something

> about Windows unlike the dopes that hang out here throwing rocks from

> the bushes.

>

> Take John C. Dvorak for example.

>

> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2123848,00.asp

>

> Who's John? Oh he just authored or co-authored a dozen books, is a

> award winning columnist for magazines like PC Magazine, Mac User,

> Forbes, Barrens, writes for the New York Times and Los Angeles Times,

> others major newspapers and magazines.

>

> What have you done Mikey besides getting fall down drunk on the

> weekends and shooting your mouth off in this backwater newsgroup?

 

Adam,

 

I don't always agree with you or the lengths you go to

when trying to get your point across. However, when it

comes to the issues of Windows Explorer and deleting/moving/

copying files locally or across a network- anyone who says

Vista does not have a major malfunction is a fukkin fool.

Far too many folks have brought this up, and those that say

"it doesn't happen on my computer, must only be you", are

either lying, enormously ignorant, or stupid sycophantic shills.

Perhaps, even a bit of all the above.

 

I have Vista installed on three different machines, and I have

experienced the pitifulness of Windows Explorer on all three.

 

 

-Michael

In article <jpeg931sfjt27509lqgi6vhnrihkrp0gmk@4ax.com>,

Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

 

> Actually I'm in good company. People that actually KNOW something

> about Windows unlike the dopes that hang out here throwing rocks from

> the bushes.

>

> Take John C. Dvorak for example.

>

> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2123848,00.asp

 

You cite Dvorak as an "authority"?!?!?!?!

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

Some much for any "credibility" you claimed to have!

 

Mike

Yes, there is a problem with using **EXPLORER** to copy/move files.

 

Why are people so adverse to using a 3rd party file manager to perform

disk/file chores? Some good ones are even FREE! Other better ones are very

inexpensive nag ware. If you can live with the initial nag screen you can

use it forever without contributing to the author of the program.

 

Total Commander is so good that I actually paid for it about 8 years ago. I

have received about 20 free upgrades since then, all on the initial price. I

can copy files over my home Vista/XP network at 75-90 meg per second. I can

copy an image of my Vista computer to my XP server in about 4 minutes (file

size about 8 gig).

 

--

 

 

Regards,

 

Richard Urban

Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

 

 

 

"MICHAEL" <u158627_emr2@dslr.net> wrote in message

news:Oz6rargxHHA.4436@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>

>

> * Adam Albright:

>> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:47:28 -0400, Mike <no@where.man> wrote:

>>

>>> In article <v0eg93h92cporg95t9ql9vfcv39ka4mdrc@4ax.com>,

>>> Adam Albright <AA@ABC.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>>> But Vista hasn't. Vista has absolutely nothing in common with

>>>>> Windows

>>>>> 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 or ME. It doesn't even have much in

>>>>> common with NT 3.1, 3,51, 4,0 or Windows 2000.

>>>>>

>>>>> Wake up, dummy.

>>>>>

>>>>> Mike

>>>> Remain clueless if you must. That fits in with most of the regulars.

>>> So you are claiming that Vista is based on Windows 1.0 code? And you

>>> call *me* clueless!?!?

>>>

>>> Mike

>>

>> Nice strawman attempt. That's about the limit of your intelligence.

>>

>> Actually I'm in good company. People that actually KNOW something

>> about Windows unlike the dopes that hang out here throwing rocks from

>> the bushes.

>>

>> Take John C. Dvorak for example.

>>

>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2123848,00.asp

>>

>> Who's John? Oh he just authored or co-authored a dozen books, is a

>> award winning columnist for magazines like PC Magazine, Mac User,

>> Forbes, Barrens, writes for the New York Times and Los Angeles Times,

>> others major newspapers and magazines.

>>

>> What have you done Mikey besides getting fall down drunk on the

>> weekends and shooting your mouth off in this backwater newsgroup?

>

> Adam,

>

> I don't always agree with you or the lengths you go to

> when trying to get your point across. However, when it

> comes to the issues of Windows Explorer and deleting/moving/

> copying files locally or across a network- anyone who says

> Vista does not have a major malfunction is a fukkin fool.

> Far too many folks have brought this up, and those that say

> "it doesn't happen on my computer, must only be you", are

> either lying, enormously ignorant, or stupid sycophantic shills.

> Perhaps, even a bit of all the above.

>

> I have Vista installed on three different machines, and I have

> experienced the pitifulness of Windows Explorer on all three.

>

>

> -Michael

Richard Urban wrote:

> Yes, there is a problem with using **EXPLORER** to copy/move files.

>

> Why are people so adverse to using a 3rd party file manager to perform disk/file chores?

> Some good ones are even FREE! Other better ones are very inexpensive nag ware. If you can

> live with the initial nag screen you can use it forever without contributing to the author

> of the program.

>

> Total Commander is so good that I actually paid for it about 8 years ago. I have received

> about 20 free upgrades since then, all on the initial price. I can copy files over my home

> Vista/XP network at 75-90 meg per second. I can copy an image of my Vista computer to my XP

> server in about 4 minutes (file size about 8 gig).

 

Richard,

 

I don't have a problem using another file manger, I have

regularly plugged Directory Opus 9 in this forum.

http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

 

I have used Total Commander and I liked it, I just think

Opus 9 is better and also has a better GUI.

 

However, this isn't really the point- Windows Explorer

should work better than it does. People pay for the

expensive Vista, and it should just work and work well. Period.

 

Here we are in 2007 and several years since XP was released-

this is the best Microsoft can offer? When I look at the tremendous

advances in technology since XP was released, from hardware to

software, and even looking at the great strides Linux has made

during that time- Microsoft can't even get Windows Explorer

to work well... a fukkin file manager. Pathetic.

 

 

-Michael