~9 weeks on Vista without one crash

XP was stable, but still had problems once in a while.

With Vista Home Premium on this 9 week old laptop, I've had some
application compatibility issues but not one single case where
the system froze or crashed. It runs perhaps 12 hours a day,
too. It's fully tricked out with an active sidebar, accessories,
wallpaper-changer, and a few old applications, and I've done
plenty of experimenting. 95 and 98 were a crash a day, XP was a
crash a week, but this is as stable as a fresh 2000 install, and
a lot safer. Why all the groaning?

If someone with tuberculosis coughs inside a crowded elevator not everyone
who is exposed will get tuberculosis either.

Mine hasn't crashed either.
I just hate the "AOHell type protect me from myself" interface so much that
I generally use the machine beside it with XP Pro.
If I wanted AOL type software, I can just install it from one of the million
CDs they sent out... and it's free...

--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!

Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
"Onlurker" <> wrote in message
news:f6c177$2m6$...
> XP was stable, but still had problems once in a while.
>
> With Vista Home Premium on this 9 week old laptop, I've had some
> application compatibility issues but not one single case where the system
> froze or crashed. It runs perhaps 12 hours a day, too. It's fully tricked
> out with an active sidebar, accessories, wallpaper-changer, and a few old
> applications, and I've done plenty of experimenting. 95 and 98 were a
> crash a day, XP was a crash a week, but this is as stable as a fresh 2000
> install, and a lot safer. Why all the groaning?

On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:19:39 -0700, Onlurker <> wrote:

>XP was stable, but still had problems once in a while.
>
>With Vista Home Premium on this 9 week old laptop, I've had some
>application compatibility issues but not one single case where
>the system froze or crashed. It runs perhaps 12 hours a day,
>too. It's fully tricked out with an active sidebar, accessories,
>wallpaper-changer, and a few old applications, and I've done
>plenty of experimenting. 95 and 98 were a crash a day, XP was a
>crash a week, but this is as stable as a fresh 2000 install, and
>a lot safer. Why all the groaning?


Big deal, you sound like a newbie. I installed Vista in February,
hasn't crashed once if you don't count "recovered from a serious
error" a couple times or the endless times it said it was necessary to
shutdown Explorer, or decided to scramble my desktop icons I just
changed the way I want them and other little things like that.

The point is how stable Vista is depends on everybody's unique setup
and combination of software and to some extend how hard you push it.
All the things you raddled off are toys. Big deal. Try doing some
serious WORK with professional grade software then you may start to
see some of it's many shortcomings, like it's moronic UAC
interference, "calculating remaining time" stupidity when
copying/moving files, inability to remember settings, unable to
generate some thumbnails, play common files types, etc..

babaloo wrote:

> If someone with tuberculosis coughs inside a crowded elevator not everyone
> who is exposed will get tuberculosis either.
>
>
>
>
Huh...you have tuberculosis?
Please don't cough in this ng ok?
Thanks for being considerate.
Frank

<<~~~hands Frank a mask & a can of BS Repellent...... (well, the label says
Lysol disenfectant spray)

--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!

Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
"Frank" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> babaloo wrote:
>
>> If someone with tuberculosis coughs inside a crowded elevator not
>> everyone who is exposed will get tuberculosis either.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Huh...you have tuberculosis?
> Please don't cough in this ng ok?
> Thanks for being considerate.
> Frank

"Adam Albright" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:19:39 -0700, Onlurker <> wrote:
>
>>XP was stable, but still had problems once in a while.
>>
>>With Vista Home Premium on this 9 week old laptop, I've had some
>>application compatibility issues but not one single case where
>>the system froze or crashed. It runs perhaps 12 hours a day,
>>too. It's fully tricked out with an active sidebar, accessories,
>>wallpaper-changer, and a few old applications, and I've done
>>plenty of experimenting. 95 and 98 were a crash a day, XP was a
>>crash a week, but this is as stable as a fresh 2000 install, and
>>a lot safer. Why all the groaning?
>
>
> Big deal, you sound like a newbie. I installed Vista in February,
> hasn't crashed once if you don't count "recovered from a serious
> error" a couple times or the endless times it said it was necessary to
> shutdown Explorer, or decided to scramble my desktop icons I just
> changed the way I want them and other little things like that.
>
> The point is how stable Vista is depends on everybody's unique setup
> and combination of software and to some extend how hard you push it.
> All the things you raddled off are toys. Big deal. Try doing some
> serious WORK with professional grade software then you may start to
> see some of it's many shortcomings, like it's moronic UAC
> interference, "calculating remaining time" stupidity when
> copying/moving files, inability to remember settings, unable to
> generate some thumbnails, play common files types, etc..
>
>
>

sounds like you are the problem


ffs, if you dont like UAC then turn it off

Adam Albright wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:19:39 -0700, Onlurker <> wrote:
>
>> XP was stable, but still had problems once in a while.
>>
>> With Vista Home Premium on this 9 week old laptop, I've had some
>> application compatibility issues but not one single case where
>> the system froze or crashed. It runs perhaps 12 hours a day,
>> too. It's fully tricked out with an active sidebar, accessories,
>> wallpaper-changer, and a few old applications, and I've done
>> plenty of experimenting. 95 and 98 were a crash a day, XP was a
>> crash a week, but this is as stable as a fresh 2000 install, and
>> a lot safer. Why all the groaning?
>
>
> Big deal, you sound like a newbie. I installed Vista in February,
> hasn't crashed once if you don't count "recovered from a serious
> error" a couple times or the endless times it said it was necessary to
> shutdown Explorer, or decided to scramble my desktop icons I just
> changed the way I want them and other little things like that.
>
> The point is how stable Vista is depends on everybody's unique setup
> and combination of software and to some extend how hard you push it.
> All the things you raddled off are toys. Big deal. Try doing some
> serious WORK with professional grade software then you may start to
> see some of it's many shortcomings, like it's moronic UAC
> interference, "calculating remaining time" stupidity when
> copying/moving files, inability to remember settings, unable to
> generate some thumbnails, play common files types, etc..
>
>
>

Gosh, am I just a lucky newbie or did you ignore the
instructions? I've been working with these gadgets since PDP-8
days and a lot of my software is home-grown, so perhaps I'm not
the average Vista user. In any case, Adam, if I had the problems
that plague you my attitude would be like yours. Presumably
you're going back to Windows 3.1?

Adam Albright <> wrote in
news::

> The point is how stable Vista is depends on everybody's unique setup
> and combination of software and to some extend how hard you push it.
> All the things you raddled off are toys. Big deal. Try doing some
> serious WORK with professional grade software then you may start to
> see some of it's many shortcomings, like it's moronic UAC
> interference, "calculating remaining time" stupidity when
> copying/moving files, inability to remember settings, unable to
> generate some thumbnails, play common files types, etc..
>

Amen to that! All this babysitter stuff on Vista drives me nuts! And it
seems as stable as XP was, but have more crashes since all the new
babysitter stuff crashes from time to time also. The UAC is the worst
ever! What I have done is run Vispa:

http://vispa.whyeye.org/

Gets rid of a lot of crap, and leave you with something manageable for
someone who drive their OS beyond YouTube.

I dualboot with Ubuntu Linux. Now that's an OS with few crashes! Doesn't
look as cool as Vista, but works like a charm all the time. Unfortunately
I have to be in Windows for work, but as soon as I can I get back to my
beloved stable Gnome desktop on Ubuntu.

--
//ceed

No, luck has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Those who depend on luck for anything, not just computers, are setting
themselves to fail.
Good hardware and software as well as reasonable preparation go
farther toward success than luck ever will.

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


"Onlurker" <> wrote in message
news:f6c6oa$ees$...
> Gosh, am I just a lucky newbie or did you ignore the instructions?
> I've been working with these gadgets since PDP-8 days and a lot of
> my software is home-grown, so perhaps I'm not the average Vista
> user. In any case, Adam, if I had the problems that plague you my
> attitude would be like yours. Presumably you're going back to
> Windows 3.1?