Programs in Vista

A couple of questions, actually.

1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.

2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
compatible with Vista?

I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
--
abc

"DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
news:F55DA2E3-BD0B-4052-A8B3-...
>A couple of questions, actually.
>
> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>
> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
> compatible with Vista?
>
> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
> --
> abc


It may help if you give us an idea of what will not work for you..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default...help&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Hi,

1) An operating system isn't built around programs, it's built to handle the
hardware it's meant to run on. Programs are built to run on that platform.
An operating system can include some degree of backward compatibility, but
there are limits as to what can be done. The programs have to be rebuilt to
comply with the newer platform. Note that this applies to any operating
system's program compatibility, it's not exclusive to Windows.

2) There is plenty, you may not be looking in the right place. Virtually
every major software manufacturer has Vista compatible versions of their
programs available.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

"DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
news:F55DA2E3-BD0B-4052-A8B3-...
>A couple of questions, actually.
>
> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>
> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
> compatible with Vista?
>
> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
> --
> abc

Hi,

Answered inline....

--
All the best,
SG

ALEX NICHOL
(1935-2005)
http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm
You will never be forgotten my friend

"DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
news:F55DA2E3-BD0B-4052-A8B3-...
>A couple of questions, actually.
>
> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.

It wasn't created that way, however with any new operating system we have to
move forward. They are many older programs that work perfectly in Vista, but
was written for XP. Some you can make work with a little tweaking, some you
need to check the software developers website to see if a fix is available
and some is simply not supported anymore. What programs are you having
trouble with?
If it's a must have program you can run Microsoft's Virtual PC 2007, it is
FREE and can save you hunders of dollars depending on the software you need
to run.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...c/default.mspx



> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
> compatible with Vista?
>
> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.

Sure their are and some will say for Vista only. Again, what software are
you refering to?

> --
> abc

I recall when Corel Draw for Windows would not work in my Windows NT OS
version. I think I couldn't save a file, which made the program next to
useless.

"Rick Rogers" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi,
>
> 1) An operating system isn't built around programs, it's built to handle
> the hardware it's meant to run on. Programs are built to run on that
> platform. An operating system can include some degree of backward
> compatibility, but there are limits as to what can be done. The programs
> have to be rebuilt to comply with the newer platform. Note that this
> applies to any operating system's program compatibility, it's not
> exclusive to Windows.
>
> 2) There is plenty, you may not be looking in the right place. Virtually
> every major software manufacturer has Vista compatible versions of their
> programs available.
>
> --
> Best of Luck,
>
> Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
> Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
> My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
>
> "DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
> news:F55DA2E3-BD0B-4052-A8B3-...
>>A couple of questions, actually.
>>
>> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs?
>> It
>> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
>> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>>
>> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
>> compatible with Vista?
>>
>> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
>> --
>> abc
>

Always find the install file on the CD and rt click>run as administrator,
then do NOT accept the default installation path, instead install somewhere
other than Program Files.
I think you will find that if you create a folder on the drive (which I
labelled simply 'Backwards') and install your 'incompatible' programs to it,
you will have much better luck.
MS decided that the Program Files folder should be 'protected'. So now any
progran that tries to keep data files with the rest of the program won't
work properly unless specially coded for Vista. They call it security, I
call it a PITA.
Try it, you may be surprised what actually works in Vista with a little
tweaking.
I can make Vista dance; but it always reminds me of the 'dead chicken'
(right after chopping off the head) instead of a nice waltz...
With the right hardware Vista runs OK, but the improvements they claim to
have made are lost on me. I didn't have any security issues with XP.
I just want my machine to work, without doing the dead chicken.....
MS missed the mark by a mile, so they moved the mark instead of correcting
the problems.
Some here swear by Vista; most people I talk to in the 'real world' swear AT
it.


"DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
news:F55DA2E3-BD0B-4052-A8B3-...
>A couple of questions, actually.
>
> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>
> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
> compatible with Vista?
>
> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
> --
> abc

MicroSoft Picture It! 99 is just one program that has refused to work with
Vista.

I tried installing it last night and it said that it needed 30mg of memory
that I didn't have (although I have about 400 gig available).

I get online this evening and there was a warning about my color scheme
being changed. I have my full screen now but the display is only as big as a
15" screen. I can't see it as coincidental that this happened the same time
as installing the old program.

I've uninstalled Picture It and the problem remains. I've followed the help
screen and the problem remains.

Any better help than on the Windows help screen out there?

I understand the comment that software should be built around hardware but
isn't that a fancy way of saying that the new hardware made most of your
programs obsolete?

Many programs will run perfectly well on Vista? How do we know which ones?
I'm perfectly happy to buy new software but if program A doesn't work on
Vista how do we know if program B will work? Neither one states it will work
on Vista.

I will admit that I didn't research my computer choice as well as I should
have. Had I done so I would never have "upgraded" to Vista.

Anyway, any clue how to return my monitor to the full size?

In the meantime I'll google about.

--
abc


"DrakeHastings" wrote:

> A couple of questions, actually.
>
> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs? It
> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>
> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
> compatible with Vista?
>
> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
> --
> abc

From http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933305

MS has a couple of compatibility lists...
https://winqual.microsoft.com/member...ifiedlist.aspx
https://winqual.microsoft.com/member...swithlist.aspx

and the upgrade advisor
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...deadvisor.mspx

These may help a little, but there's no guarantee.

re the monitor, if changing the screen resolution doesn't help, try
reloading the display driver.


--
http://get.live.com/wlmail/overview


"DrakeHastings" <> wrote in message
news:E0C08740-E43F-488A-89DF-...
> MicroSoft Picture It! 99 is just one program that has refused to work with
> Vista.
>
> I tried installing it last night and it said that it needed 30mg of memory
> that I didn't have (although I have about 400 gig available).
>
> I get online this evening and there was a warning about my color scheme
> being changed. I have my full screen now but the display is only as big
> as a
> 15" screen. I can't see it as coincidental that this happened the same
> time
> as installing the old program.
>
> I've uninstalled Picture It and the problem remains. I've followed the
> help
> screen and the problem remains.
>
> Any better help than on the Windows help screen out there?
>
> I understand the comment that software should be built around hardware but
> isn't that a fancy way of saying that the new hardware made most of your
> programs obsolete?
>
> Many programs will run perfectly well on Vista? How do we know which
> ones?
> I'm perfectly happy to buy new software but if program A doesn't work on
> Vista how do we know if program B will work? Neither one states it will
> work
> on Vista.
>
> I will admit that I didn't research my computer choice as well as I should
> have. Had I done so I would never have "upgraded" to Vista.
>
> Anyway, any clue how to return my monitor to the full size?
>
> In the meantime I'll google about.
>
> --
> abc
>
>
> "DrakeHastings" wrote:
>
>> A couple of questions, actually.
>>
>> 1) Why was Vista created without the ability to run earlier programs?
>> It
>> is very frustrating to have to go through hell each time I want to run a
>> program that worked perfectly well on XP, ME, 2000, 99, etc.
>>
>> 2) Will there ever be any software that is boxed stating that it is
>> compatible with Vista?
>>
>> I feel like I've spent $1000 on a computer that doesn't work.
>> --
>> abc