How Microsoft can fix all Vista's Problems

All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista grafted
on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't work very
well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could simply relabel
drivers as needed.
Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
"new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and interface
Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually works! The only
feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine but that could be
another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop search anyway.

"nsag" <> wrote in message
news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
> Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista
> grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't
> work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could
> simply relabel drivers as needed.
> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
> "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and
> interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually
> works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine
> but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop
> search anyway.

Why didn't Microsoft think of that? Why not just take an old product and
continue to resell it over and over and over and over again? Why waste
billions developing something new when you can just sell something old.

Why? Because some of us want something new, some of us like progress.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*

Paul Smith wrote:
> "nsag" <> wrote in message
> news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
>> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with
>> the Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of
>> Vista grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which
>> don't work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party
>> vendors could simply relabel drivers as needed.
>> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that
>> looks "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop
>> and interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and
>> actually works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista
>> search engine but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the
>> Google desktop search anyway.
>
> Why didn't Microsoft think of that? Why not just take an old product
> and continue to resell it over and over and over and over again? Why
> waste billions developing something new when you can just sell something
> old.
>
> Why? Because some of us want something new, some of us like progress.
>

If you are telling the truth, you don't want Vista but Linux, the
operating system for the 21st century, not some remake of NT.

Alias

"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:...

> If you are telling the truth, you don't want Vista but Linux, the
> operating system for the 21st century, not some remake of NT.

I have Linux, both on the client and on the server. It's more of a 19th
century OS at this point than a contender to Windows.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*

Why are you on a Vista list then? If you like Linux I can give you plenty of
those list to visit.


"Alias" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Paul Smith wrote:
>> "nsag" <> wrote in message
>> news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
>>> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
>>> Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista
>>> grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't
>>> work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could
>>> simply relabel drivers as needed.
>>> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
>>> "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and
>>> interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually
>>> works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine
>>> but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop
>>> search anyway.
>>
>> Why didn't Microsoft think of that? Why not just take an old product and
>> continue to resell it over and over and over and over again? Why waste
>> billions developing something new when you can just sell something old.
>>
>> Why? Because some of us want something new, some of us like progress.
>>
>
> If you are telling the truth, you don't want Vista but Linux, the
> operating system for the 21st century, not some remake of NT.
>
> Alias
>

"nsag" <> wrote in
news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-:

> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP
> with the Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface
> changes of Vista grafted on. The patch would convert Vista
> drivers, many of which don't work very well anyway, to XP
> counterparts and third party vendors could simply relabel drivers
> as needed. Then you would have a fast, stable, universally
> compatible OS that looks "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary
> changes to the desktop and interface Microsoft feels compelled to
> put in a "new" OS) and actually works! The only feature that might
> be lacking is the Vista search engine but that could be another
> patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop search anyway.
>
>

The majority of Vista complaints are from people insisting it be XP
and will screw with everything they can to try and make it XP.

Vista is a new Breed of Windows it is not XP! If people spent as much
time learning Vista as they did trying to make it XP they wouldn't
have so much to bitch about.

There is more to Vista then the GUI I wont get into details there
are many web sites available for you to read and learn.

Granted Vista has it's quirks but 98% of what is complained about
in here or anywhere else is USER ERROR not Vista.

Is Vista ahead of Hardware and Software developers? Yes it is and
that is making for one rough transistion, but once they catch up
things will be much smoother. I for one like to see companies push
new technology, if it is Linux users, Apple or Microsoft in the long
run we will all benifiet from it.


Dave

"nsag" <> wrote in message
news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
> Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista
> grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't
> work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could
> simply relabel drivers as needed.
> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
> "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and
> interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually
> works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine
> but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop
> search anyway.


Aero is only the icing on the cake. You are ignoring the rest of Vista and
focusing on the hype.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca

"nsag" <> wrote in message
news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
> Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista
> grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't
> work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could
> simply relabel drivers as needed.
> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
> "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and
> interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually
> works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine
> but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop
> search anyway.


Alternatively you could actually try Vista to see what new features there
are. Radical I know, but it can be done.

--
Jon

Alias wrote:


>
> If you are telling the truth, you don't want Vista but Linux, the
> operating system for the 21st century, not some remake of NT.

An extremely ignorant reply (not surprising) that exhibits your total
lack of any technical knowledge and revels once again that you're only a
linux loser troll.
Get lost.
You're not wanted here.
Frank

Best thing you can do is wipe Vista clean from your machine. Don't worry
about any data currently on your PC because it really doesn't matter at this
point. Install XP and you will be happy.


"nsag" <> wrote in message
news:CA17B278-74D5-4A8D-928F-...
> All it would take would be a service patch that consisted of XP with the
> Aero interface and the assorted arbitrary interface changes of Vista
> grafted on. The patch would convert Vista drivers, many of which don't
> work very well anyway, to XP counterparts and third party vendors could
> simply relabel drivers as needed.
> Then you would have a fast, stable, universally compatible OS that looks
> "new" (I.e. has the requisite arbitrary changes to the desktop and
> interface Microsoft feels compelled to put in a "new" OS) and actually
> works! The only feature that might be lacking is the Vista search engine
> but that could be another patch. Most people prefer the Google desktop
> search anyway.