OT: Windows 7 (XP with a new look!)

What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the Asus X5DIJ laptop
that I just bought for my Aunty !!!

Having just finished a late shift at work, I thought I'd run the Asus
"Recovery Disc Creation" procedure, (Laptop arrived this morning, just
before I had to go to work), so that it gets done. ....ready for when I
take it in to her tommorrow morning. The supplied "AI Recovery" has been
running for over 45 minutes, first creating a backup image, then ISO files,
....then it finally burnt the 1st ISO image to DVD+r ...or they may be -r'
discs btw, not sure now, (good wuality ones btw), ....and then the f*****g
thing decided to verify the first DVD+r that had been burnt.

Over 45 minutes !!!!!, ...it's 00:55am, I would really like to go to bed and
sleep !!!, ...and it was still verifying that 1st DVD+r when I came out to
my office here to have a rant.
I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented, and with
all the hardware and software "development" across the past THIRTY years
there appears to be NO decrease in the time it takes the b****y things to
b****y well get on and do something !!!

During recent months, I've been used to Norton Ghost 14.0 backing up my main
PC hard-drive in less than 6 minutes (internal SATAII hd to SATAII hd's).
So quite what this heap of crap is up to - goodness only knows !

best regards,

Richard

WTF are you polluting Vista & WinXP newsgroups with this rant, Richard?

<re-plonk>


RJK wrote:
> What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the Asus X5DIJ laptop
> that I just bought for my Aunty !!!
>
> Having just finished a late shift at work, I thought I'd run the Asus
> "Recovery Disc Creation" procedure, (Laptop arrived this morning, just
> before I had to go to work), so that it gets done. ....ready for when I
> take it in to her tommorrow morning. The supplied "AI Recovery" has been
> running for over 45 minutes, first creating a backup image, then ISO
> files,
> ...then it finally burnt the 1st ISO image to DVD+r ...or they may be -r'
> discs btw, not sure now, (good wuality ones btw), ....and then the f*****g
> thing decided to verify the first DVD+r that had been burnt.
>
> Over 45 minutes !!!!!, ...it's 00:55am, I would really like to go to bed
> and
> sleep !!!, ...and it was still verifying that 1st DVD+r when I came out
> to
> my office here to have a rant.
> I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented, and
> with
> all the hardware and software "development" across the past THIRTY years
> there appears to be NO decrease in the time it takes the b****y things to
> b****y well get on and do something !!!
>
> During recent months, I've been used to Norton Ghost 14.0 backing up my
> main
> PC hard-drive in less than 6 minutes (internal SATAII hd to SATAII hd's).
> So quite what this heap of crap is up to - goodness only knows !
>
> best regards,
>
> Richard

"Stan Starinski" <China@stealsUSJobsPatentsSoftwareMusicVideo> wrote in
message news:ep$...
>> I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented
>
> So you started in 1976?
> By the way, Asus is not a bad brand, it's favored by techies,
> do-it-yourselves, etc., it's not a "cozy" brand like Apple. Their
> specialty is bare-bone motherboards for desktops, and sleek laptops with
> more substance, than appearance.
> Despite that I'll still buy an HP again, when it's time, for political
> reasons (too long to explain why).
>
> Second, Windows7's been perfect here, as well.
>
> I think you were having a bad day/bad luck, and no reason to blame either
> Asus or Windows7.
> When you write optical disks e.g. DVDR, be sure to select most
> conservative settings, without bells & whistles of "life file system", UDF
> and other invitations for trouble.
> Choose Mastering, Disk-at-Once, maximum compatibility and don't let it run
> too clos eot capacity limit, AND make sure long filenames are not nested
> too deeply inside filetrees., AND make sure your DVD writing software is
> set up to "verify" disk after writing.
> It takes a long time even on most pwerful computers, but if you write
> critical data, time is not the priority. Quality is.

hi :-) ...can't really remember year - 1st PC was 8086 8mhz with
512kb+128kb=640kb ...oh those wonderful days when one fought with
Quarterdeck to get everything stuffed into that high memory area !
...and manually configuring DOS 3.2's himem.sys and emm386.exe etc !
(extended mem. manager and expanded memory manager etc. !)
DOS 2.1 and another OS was shipped with it ...until MSDOS won the day !

Asus x5DIJ looks and feels lovely, and Windows 7 is responsive and lovely
but, why on earth I'm here at 1:30am still waiting for this "AI Recovery"
software to produce 4 x DVD's is somewhat disappointing to say the least !

regards, Richard

RJK wrote:
> What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the Asus X5DIJ
> laptop that I just bought for my Aunty !!!
>
> Having just finished a late shift at work, I thought I'd run the
> Asus "Recovery Disc Creation" procedure, (Laptop arrived this
> morning, just before I had to go to work), so that it gets done. ....ready
> for when I take it in to her tommorrow morning. The supplied "AI
> Recovery" has been running for over 45 minutes, first
> creating a backup image, then ISO files, ...then it finally burnt
> the 1st ISO image to DVD+r ...or they may be -r' discs btw, not
> sure now, (good wuality ones btw), ....and then the f*****g thing
> decided to verify the first DVD+r that had been burnt.
> Over 45 minutes !!!!!, ...it's 00:55am, I would really like to go
> to bed and sleep !!!, ...and it was still verifying that 1st DVD+r
> when I came out to my office here to have a rant.
> I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented,
> and with all the hardware and software "development" across the
> past THIRTY years there appears to be NO decrease in the time it
> takes the b****y things to b****y well get on and do something !!!
>
> During recent months, I've been used to Norton Ghost 14.0 backing
> up my main PC hard-drive in less than 6 minutes (internal SATAII hd
> to SATAII hd's). So quite what this heap of crap is up to -
> goodness only knows !

What does the OEM's restoration/recovery disc creation methodology have to
do with your subject?

Windows 7 is not the reason for your issue. The poor decision not to insist
on actual installation media for the software installed on the system and
not just some procedure to make the media/restore from disk is closer to the
reason.

Windows 7 is far from "XP with a new look" IMHO. Maybe Vista with all the
issues fixed.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

"RJK" <> wrote in
news:#:

> What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the
> Asus X5DIJ laptop that I just bought for my Aunty !!!

<SNIP>

It's a lot harder with laptops (is your Aunty very "mobile" or
does she just like Mickey Mouse keyboards?), but IMO the only
reasonable way to buy a computer is to have a friendly
neighborhood computer shop build one to your /exact/ specs,
without all the **** you don't need or want, and WITH the stuff
you need or want but will either not get at all, or get the
cheapest/worst quality (that's what goes into name brand
computers in case you didn't know), all for a lower price than a
name brand and with service a few blocks away instead of weeks
or months of emails and charged LD phone calls.

AND you insist on the ORIGINAL OEM discs.

Richard

Why this rant and why here in the XP and Vista groups. You should have made sure
that you got the correct install media beforehand

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"RJK" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the Asus X5DIJ laptop that I
> just bought for my Aunty !!!
>
> Having just finished a late shift at work, I thought I'd run the Asus "Recovery
> Disc Creation" procedure, (Laptop arrived this morning, just before I had to go to
> work), so that it gets done. ....ready for when I take it in to her tommorrow
> morning. The supplied "AI Recovery" has been running for over 45 minutes, first
> creating a backup image, then ISO files, ...then it finally burnt the 1st ISO
> image to DVD+r ...or they may be -r' discs btw, not sure now, (good wuality ones
> btw), ....and then the f*****g thing decided to verify the first DVD+r that had
> been burnt.
>
> Over 45 minutes !!!!!, ...it's 00:55am, I would really like to go to bed and sleep
> !!!, ...and it was still verifying that 1st DVD+r when I came out to my office
> here to have a rant.
> I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented, and with all
> the hardware and software "development" across the past THIRTY years there appears
> to be NO decrease in the time it takes the b****y things to b****y well get on and
> do something !!!
>
> During recent months, I've been used to Norton Ghost 14.0 backing up my main PC
> hard-drive in less than 6 minutes (internal SATAII hd to SATAII hd's). So quite
> what this heap of crap is up to - goodness only knows !
>
> best regards,
>
> Richard
>

Stan Starinski wrote:
> I am today 37, born/raised in Europe
> I'd agree 8086 was one of the early "practical" PC's. Can never tell
> who/what was "precisely" first. - often there're multiple events, people
> or
> products. There were people before Einstein with similar equations but he
> got his Theory officially presented.
>
> But strictly speaking earliest PC's were long before 8086. First off, the
> number "80" appearing in immense number of IC chips of that era simply
> indicates the decade - 1980's.
> But before that - even I remember using it, we had 8080, truly the first
> practical Microprocessor - by Intel, piror to that we had all kinds of "do
> it yourself" kits including venerable Apple in 1976, base don Motorola MP.
> It is therefore a custom to specify the birth of PC's as 1976 Apple. THAT
> I
> obviously can't remember (was 4 year sold!).
>
> But IBM quickly seized initiative from "hobbyist" Apple, and produced an
> industrial/business version called simply IBM PC, that's when I'd like to
> put a mark because they were first to market the term "PC" as opposed to
> mainframes of previous era (even if Apple used the term, it wasn't a TM).
> 1980 was a crucial year
>
> Some years later, I remember reading "Life & Science" magazine in that
> country where I was born, by which time USA already had IBM PC XT & RT,
> and
> even a hardisk called "winchester" then with a whopping 1MB size!! It
> cost
> like a medium car, and breaking down as a habit. But we couldn't have
> even
> that.
> In my country we had to use crap, but we had best programmers - the irony!
> SO the flow started - brains flew to America, hardware flew to that
> country.
> As soon as we got here (a few of my relatives been living in North America
> for at least a century, but we were late), I grabbed a free gift from my
> father's former wife's new husband. he was a radiologist (medical), and
> he
> was about to throw out 8086-based PC AT (?), its memory was cutting off at
> some small number and stopped self test w/failure.
> Well I took it apart and fixed memory by moving banks around until I hit
> the
> bad one, and removed it; maxiumum was 640KB. That was a huge number, as
> prior to that our High School "gang' built Z80 gaming machines where 32Kb
> was considered an achievement, more often it was 16KB memory.
>
> It sounds ridiculous now, but... people really had to use brains to
> program
> it.
> Every byte was precious. I did some insane tricks, like resuing the same
> memory byte for both instruction, brnach jump address or data - when they
> coincided, things which would be illegal in progrmaming today.
>
> Anyway, 8086 is too powerful to call "first".
> Try i8080, Zilog Z80, Motorola 68000.

You mean 6800.
And don't forget the 6502 (used in Apple II).

RJK wrote:
> What a heap of crap, ...not just Windows 7 but, also the Asus X5DIJ laptop
> that I just bought for my Aunty !!!
>
> Having just finished a late shift at work, I thought I'd run the Asus
> "Recovery Disc Creation" procedure, (Laptop arrived this morning, just
> before I had to go to work), so that it gets done. ....ready for when I
> take it in to her tommorrow morning. The supplied "AI Recovery" has been
> running for over 45 minutes, first creating a backup image, then ISO
> files,
> ...then it finally burnt the 1st ISO image to DVD+r ...or they may be -r'
> discs btw, not sure now, (good wuality ones btw), ....and then the f*****g
> thing decided to verify the first DVD+r that had been burnt.
>
> Over 45 minutes !!!!!, ...it's 00:55am, I would really like to go to bed
> and
> sleep !!!, ...and it was still verifying that 1st DVD+r when I came out
> to
> my office here to have a rant.
> I'm 54 years old and have been using PC's since they were invented, and
> with
> all the hardware and software "development" across the past THIRTY years
> there appears to be NO decrease in the time it takes the b****y things to
> b****y well get on and do something !!!
>
> During recent months, I've been used to Norton Ghost 14.0 backing up my
> main
> PC hard-drive in less than 6 minutes (internal SATAII hd to SATAII hd's).
> So quite what this heap of crap is up to - goodness only knows !
>
> best regards,
>
> Richard

Obviously one should use a disk cloning or disk imaging program. This has
nothing to do with Windows 7.

"Stan Starinski" <China@stealsUSJobsPatentsSoftwareMusicVideo> wrote in
message news:...
>I am today 37, born/raised in Europe
> I'd agree 8086 was one of the early "practical" PC's. Can never tell
> who/what was "precisely" first. - often there're multiple events, people
> or products. There were people before Einstein with similar equations but
> he got his Theory officially presented.
>
> But strictly speaking earliest PC's were long before 8086. First off, the
> number "80" appearing in immense number of IC chips of that era simply
> indicates the decade - 1980's.
> But before that - even I remember using it, we had 8080, truly the first
> practical Microprocessor - by Intel, piror to that we had all kinds of "do
> it yourself" kits including venerable Apple in 1976, base don Motorola MP.
> It is therefore a custom to specify the birth of PC's as 1976 Apple. THAT
> I obviously can't remember (was 4 year sold!).
>
> But IBM quickly seized initiative from "hobbyist" Apple, and produced an
> industrial/business version called simply IBM PC, that's when I'd like to
> put a mark because they were first to market the term "PC" as opposed to
> mainframes of previous era (even if Apple used the term, it wasn't a TM).
> 1980 was a crucial year
>
> Some years later, I remember reading "Life & Science" magazine in that
> country where I was born, by which time USA already had IBM PC XT & RT,
> and even a hardisk called "winchester" then with a whopping 1MB size!! It
> cost like a medium car, and breaking down as a habit. But we couldn't
> have even that.
> In my country we had to use crap, but we had best programmers - the irony!
> SO the flow started - brains flew to America, hardware flew to that
> country.
> As soon as we got here (a few of my relatives been living in North America
> for at least a century, but we were late), I grabbed a free gift from my
> father's former wife's new husband. he was a radiologist (medical), and
> he was about to throw out 8086-based PC AT (?), its memory was cutting off
> at some small number and stopped self test w/failure.
> Well I took it apart and fixed memory by moving banks around until I hit
> the bad one, and removed it; maxiumum was 640KB. That was a huge number,
> as prior to that our High School "gang' built Z80 gaming machines where
> 32Kb was considered an achievement, more often it was 16KB memory.
>
> It sounds ridiculous now, but... people really had to use brains to
> program it.
> Every byte was precious. I did some insane tricks, like resuing the same
> memory byte for both instruction, brnach jump address or data - when they
> coincided, things which would be illegal in progrmaming today.
>
> Anyway, 8086 is too powerful to call "first".
> Try i8080, Zilog Z80, Motorola 68000.
>
> To me Z80 has the most meaning, I was 16.... that microprocessor was
> ceated by geniuses in California (?), it was too good for its time. It
> was so cheap, robust, reliable that BELIEVE it or not, still used in
> appliances, home automation, etc. Smaller, expanded versions, but same
> core architecture.
> That is not related to Intel i80xx series or Motorola.

The first microprocessor was the Intel 4004. It consisted of two 4
bit chips. These were combined into the 8008, the first 8 bit CPU.
That's where the 80 designation started. The first practical CPU,
the 8080, capable of running BASIC, was introduced in 1974.
The first hobbyist 8080 kit was the 1975 MITS Altair 8800, which
also used the S-100 bus, which was the defacto standard until
the introduction of the IBM PC with the ISA bus.

The first mass produced systems were the Apple II, and the
Radio Shack TRS-80, both introduced in 1977. The Apple II
was the first to use color graphics.

Ian D wrote:
> "Stan Starinski" <China@stealsUSJobsPatentsSoftwareMusicVideo> wrote in
> message news:...
>> I am today 37, born/raised in Europe
>> I'd agree 8086 was one of the early "practical" PC's. Can never tell
>> who/what was "precisely" first. - often there're multiple events, people
>> or products. There were people before Einstein with similar equations
>> but
>> he got his Theory officially presented.
>>
>> But strictly speaking earliest PC's were long before 8086. First off,
>> the
>> number "80" appearing in immense number of IC chips of that era simply
>> indicates the decade - 1980's.
>> But before that - even I remember using it, we had 8080, truly the first
>> practical Microprocessor - by Intel, piror to that we had all kinds of
>> "do
>> it yourself" kits including venerable Apple in 1976, base don Motorola
>> MP.
>> It is therefore a custom to specify the birth of PC's as 1976 Apple.
>> THAT
>> I obviously can't remember (was 4 year sold!).
>>
>> But IBM quickly seized initiative from "hobbyist" Apple, and produced an
>> industrial/business version called simply IBM PC, that's when I'd like to
>> put a mark because they were first to market the term "PC" as opposed to
>> mainframes of previous era (even if Apple used the term, it wasn't a TM).
>> 1980 was a crucial year
>>
>> Some years later, I remember reading "Life & Science" magazine in that
>> country where I was born, by which time USA already had IBM PC XT & RT,
>> and even a hardisk called "winchester" then with a whopping 1MB size!!
>> It
>> cost like a medium car, and breaking down as a habit. But we couldn't
>> have even that.
>> In my country we had to use crap, but we had best programmers - the
>> irony!
>> SO the flow started - brains flew to America, hardware flew to that
>> country.
>> As soon as we got here (a few of my relatives been living in North
>> America
>> for at least a century, but we were late), I grabbed a free gift from my
>> father's former wife's new husband. he was a radiologist (medical), and
>> he was about to throw out 8086-based PC AT (?), its memory was cutting
>> off
>> at some small number and stopped self test w/failure.
>> Well I took it apart and fixed memory by moving banks around until I hit
>> the bad one, and removed it; maxiumum was 640KB. That was a huge number,
>> as prior to that our High School "gang' built Z80 gaming machines where
>> 32Kb was considered an achievement, more often it was 16KB memory.
>>
>> It sounds ridiculous now, but... people really had to use brains to
>> program it.
>> Every byte was precious. I did some insane tricks, like resuing the same
>> memory byte for both instruction, brnach jump address or data - when they
>> coincided, things which would be illegal in progrmaming today.
>>
>> Anyway, 8086 is too powerful to call "first".
>> Try i8080, Zilog Z80, Motorola 68000.

6800, not 68000.

>> To me Z80 has the most meaning, I was 16.... that microprocessor was
>> ceated by geniuses in California (?), it was too good for its time. It
>> was so cheap, robust, reliable that BELIEVE it or not, still used in
>> appliances, home automation, etc. Smaller, expanded versions, but same
>> core architecture.
>> That is not related to Intel i80xx series or Motorola.
>
> The first microprocessor was the Intel 4004.

Thanks for bringing that up. - I couldn't remember the 4xxx number!!

> It consisted of two 4
> bit chips. These were combined into the 8008, the first 8 bit CPU.
> That's where the 80 designation started. The first practical CPU,
> the 8080, capable of running BASIC, was introduced in 1974.
> The first hobbyist 8080 kit was the 1975 MITS Altair 8800, which
> also used the S-100 bus, which was the defacto standard until
> the introduction of the IBM PC with the ISA bus.
>
> The first mass produced systems were the Apple II, and the

With the 6502.

> Radio Shack TRS-80, both introduced in 1977.

Don't remember what up the Trash 80 used, but think it was one of the Intel
8xxx series, not Motorola. Or maybe the Z-80??? Yeah, I think it was
the Z-80.

> The Apple II was the first to use color graphics.

I guess Atari and Commodore followed soon afterward, but my memory is
fading.