Re: Freeware to equip a new Windows XP PC for a basic user

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:15:54 -0600, M.L. wrote:

>> - Office documents with Sun OpenOffice to replace MS Office
>> http://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-...-Windows.shtml
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Disagree. You need basic word-processing, spreadsheet calculation, slide
creation programs even for the most basic of new Windows XP users. If there
is better freeware than Sun OpenOffice for Windows, then let us all know
the secret.

>> - Email with Thunderbird if you use a POP server
>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Strongly disagree. You must have a POP/IMAP client. It doesn't have to be
Thunderbird but you need it, even for the most basic of Windows XP users.

>> - Browse the web with Firefox to replace IE
>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Strongly disagree. You must have a browser today and IE is so insecure that
even the US Government recommends not using it. You can pick *any* other
browser than Internet Explorer, but most of us would prefer Firefox over
K-Meleon, Safari, Opera, Netscape, SeaMonkey, OffbyOne, etc.

>> - Telephone with Skype to replace land lines
> This is pure bloat for a new system.

Agree. I use my cell phone all the time.

>> - GNU Flash Alternative to replace Macromedia Flash Player
>> http://www.osnews.com/comments/18531
> Some web pages won't accept anything but Macromedia.

Agree. But Macromedia is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
GNU Flash Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

>> - Play DVDs and videos and music with Media Player Classic
>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...er_Classic.htm
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Agree. Play DVDs and MP3s on your TV.

>> - QuicktimeAlternative to replace QuickTime
>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Agree. But Quicktime is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
Quicktime Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

>> - RealAlternative to replace RealPlayer
>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Agree. But RealPlayer is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
Realplayer Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

>> - Ipod with SharePod to replace ITunes song transfer
>> http://www.sturm.net.nz/website.php?...&Page=SharePod
> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

Agree. Listen to music on your stereo sound system instead.

What a stupid poster YOU are!

Have a brain? not *needed*, a rock with the same IQ is sitting in your
garden, use *that* instead!


"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <> wrote in
message news:9krkj.33841$. net...
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:15:54 -0600, M.L. wrote:
>
>>> - Office documents with Sun OpenOffice to replace MS Office
>>> http://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-...-Windows.shtml
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Disagree. You need basic word-processing, spreadsheet calculation, slide
> creation programs even for the most basic of new Windows XP users. If
> there
> is better freeware than Sun OpenOffice for Windows, then let us all know
> the secret.
>
>>> - Email with Thunderbird if you use a POP server
>>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Strongly disagree. You must have a POP/IMAP client. It doesn't have to be
> Thunderbird but you need it, even for the most basic of Windows XP users.
>
>>> - Browse the web with Firefox to replace IE
>>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Strongly disagree. You must have a browser today and IE is so insecure
> that
> even the US Government recommends not using it. You can pick *any* other
> browser than Internet Explorer, but most of us would prefer Firefox over
> K-Meleon, Safari, Opera, Netscape, SeaMonkey, OffbyOne, etc.
>
>>> - Telephone with Skype to replace land lines
>> This is pure bloat for a new system.
>
> Agree. I use my cell phone all the time.
>
>>> - GNU Flash Alternative to replace Macromedia Flash Player
>>> http://www.osnews.com/comments/18531
>> Some web pages won't accept anything but Macromedia.
>
> Agree. But Macromedia is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
> GNU Flash Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.
>
>>> - Play DVDs and videos and music with Media Player Classic
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...er_Classic.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. Play DVDs and MP3s on your TV.
>
>>> - QuicktimeAlternative to replace QuickTime
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. But Quicktime is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
> Quicktime Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.
>
>>> - RealAlternative to replace RealPlayer
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. But RealPlayer is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run with
> Realplayer Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.
>
>>> - Ipod with SharePod to replace ITunes song transfer
>>> http://www.sturm.net.nz/website.php?...&Page=SharePod
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. Listen to music on your stereo sound system instead.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:29:25 GMT, Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer
Coordinator wrote:

> ...most of us would prefer Firefox over K-Meleon, Safari, Opera,
> Netscape, SeaMonkey, OffbyOne, etc.

I don't think so!

--
Chris Game

"Keep things a simple as possible, but not simpler."
-- Albert Einstein

>>> - Office documents with Sun OpenOffice to replace MS Office
>>> http://www.softpedia.com/get/Office-...-Windows.shtml
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Disagree. You need basic word-processing, spreadsheet calculation,
> slide
> creation programs even for the most basic of new Windows XP users. If
> there
> is better freeware than Sun OpenOffice for Windows, then let us all
> know the secret.

Unless a client tells me otherwise, I would never install software that
duplicates those offered with the basic Windows install. Windows comes
with a good basic word processor. Most newbie users don't have a need
for Excel or PowerPoint substitutes. And if they did, only then would I
install OpenOffice.

>>> - Email with Thunderbird if you use a POP server
>>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Strongly disagree. You must have a POP/IMAP client. It doesn't have
> to be
> Thunderbird but you need it, even for the most basic of Windows XP
> users.

The basic Windows install comes with Outlook Express to handle those
tasks. As their installation tech it's not your job to determine that
they need to substitute redundant software to suit your preference.

>>> - Browse the web with Firefox to replace IE
>>> http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.

> Strongly disagree. You must have a browser today and IE is so
> insecure that
> even the US Government recommends not using it. You can pick *any*
> other
> browser than Internet Explorer, but most of us would prefer Firefox
> over
> K-Meleon, Safari, Opera, Netscape, SeaMonkey, OffbyOne, etc.

As their installation tech it's your job to lock down IE to make it
reasonably secure. No need to add redundant software they didn't ask
for. And firefox has its security issues also.

>>> - Telephone with Skype to replace land lines
>> This is pure bloat for a new system.
>
> Agree. I use my cell phone all the time.

I would install VOIP software only if the client asked for it.

>>> - GNU Flash Alternative to replace Macromedia Flash Player
>>> http://www.osnews.com/comments/18531
>> Some web pages won't accept anything but Macromedia.
>
> Agree. But Macromedia is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run
> with
> GNU Flash Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

Substituting a different Flash player will only confuse a newbie due to
lack of browser integration. Macromedia's Flash player is not bloatware
anyway.

>>> - Play DVDs and videos and music with Media Player Classic
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...er_Classic.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. Play DVDs and MP3s on your TV.

Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
computer.

>>> - QuicktimeAlternative to replace QuickTime
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. But Quicktime is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run
> with
> Quicktime Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

Some websites won't automatically play mov files if Quicktime is not
installed. A newbie will probably let their browser install Quicktime
anyway in order to play the file.

>>> - RealAlternative to replace RealPlayer
>>> http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. But RealPlayer is bloatware also. Any web page that won't run
> with
> Realplayer Alternative is a web page not worth viewing.

Newbies aren't interested in software politics. If they want to play a
RealPlayer file they'll probably let their browser install it anyway.

>>> - Ipod with SharePod to replace ITunes song transfer
>>> http://www.sturm.net.nz/website.php?...&Page=SharePod
>> Not a *needed* basic program for new XP users.
>
> Agree. Listen to music on your stereo sound system instead.

Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
computer, or use the software that came with their IPod.

Overall, it's presumptuous to inject your software politics onto a
newbie's system. Let them take advantage of their native software. As
they become more savvy they can add new software on their own.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:20:02 -0600, M.L. wrote:
> Unless a client tells me otherwise, I would never install software that
> duplicates those offered with the basic Windows install. Windows comes
> with a good basic word processor. Most newbie users don't have a need
> for Excel or PowerPoint substitutes. And if they did, only then would I
> install

Agree with you wholeheartedly. EVERYONE needs a "word processor" but not
everyone needs Excel or PowerPoint replacements. I do agree now that you've
clarified that position.

Yes, for basic word processing, the Word-like "freeware" (more like
"existware") should suffice for a newbie.

>>>> - Email with Thunderbird if you use a POP server
>> You must have a POP/IMAP client.
>> It doesn't have to be Thunderbird
> The basic Windows install comes with Outlook Express

Actually this is also a great point. Personally, I've set up many POP3
clients yet every time I come across Outlook Express, it wants to connect
and create some bloated thing called Exchange. I have no idea what that is
as all I need is a POP and SMTP and NNTP server but there it is. Outlook
Express still seemed to "expect" something to be created. That always
frustrated me because I did not enjoy having to "unlearn" outlook express
of it's predilictions for Exchange.

So, I do agree with you. I think I let my personal distaste for Outlook
Express' complicated setup get in the way of my suggestions. If Outlook
Express truly can be set up simply, in seconds, with just a POP & SMTP and
NNTP server, then I will agree with you wholeheartedly.

However, if OE makes us go through the pain of telling it to shut up about
an Exchange server, then it goes in the trash bin along with all the other
idiotic bloatware in the list. You tell me.

> As their installation tech it's your job to lock down IE to make it
> reasonably secure. No need to add redundant software they didn't ask
> for. And firefox has its security issues also.

If the customer is OK with IE, then I guess that's a fine suggestion.
Personally, I can't stand anything that doesn't wipe out my cookies the
moment I close the browser and that which doesn't stop every popup and that
which doesn't have all the plugins that I've grown to love and need.
However, for very basic user, I agree with you that Internet Explorer
should suffice.

> I would install VOIP software only if the client asked for it.
Agreed.

> Substituting a different Flash player will only confuse a newbie due to
> lack of browser integration. Macromedia's Flash player is not bloatware
> anyway.

Maybe. It certainly isn't as bad as RealPlayer, for example. Or Quicktime.
Again, my personal distastes may have clouded my judgement. I can't think
of a single swf or flv file that *ever* was needed, so, I think I'm
objecting more to the content than to the format and resultant player. We
can all get along without a single flv file and never be the wiser.

> Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
> computer.
If they're gonna use Windows Media Player, they're muuuuch better off with
Media Player Classic which starts up faster, much simpler interface,
doesn't try to sell you anything, and can play anything that is worth
playing. This is a no brainer. Remove WMP the moment it first comes up!


> Some websites won't automatically play mov files if Quicktime is not
> installed.

They will if Quicktime Alternative is installed properly.

> Newbies aren't interested in software politics. If they want to play a
> RealPlayer file they'll probably let their browser install it anyway.

I hate RealPlayer more than I hate IE so I have trouble with this one.
Still, I understand your logic and, for those who can't discern as you and
I can, they just might be able to get along with RealPlayer without
slitting their wrists in desperation.

> Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
> computer, or use the software that came with their IPod.
No software comes with an iPod. The iTunes program is total bloatware crap,
forcing upon you the arbitrary rules and regulations of Apple which you
have no need to be bound by (many a person has lost their entire music
collection, for example, due to the propensity of iTunes to synchronize
that which no longer exists on your system - the google record proves that
one out in spades).

> Overall, it's presumptuous to inject your software politics onto a
> newbie's system. Let them take advantage of their native software. As
> they become more savvy they can add new software on their own.

Hmmmm... maybe. Maybe not. The whole point is WE have the experience to
make the newbie's life better. Simple things we can teach them will give
them immense leverage.

For example, "don't put anything into a directory with a space in the name"
is a simple way to teach them to organize their system the way THEY want to
organize it; not the way Microsoft and brand-loving companies do. For
example, the "Documents and Settings" directory is filled with so much
branded crap that you can never organize it.

Same with the idiotic "Program Files" directory. Who on earth installs
software by brand name anyway? That's ridiculous. Software has always been
best organized by function. Ask any UNIX guru, for example. They forgot
more about operating systems than any Windows user ever knew. They would
NEVER organize a software hierarchy by company name, not in a million
years.

So, in summary, it's OUR JOB to set the newbies up right. Our experience,
such as maintaining our own menus that reflect the same hierarchy as the
software system, for example, would save them IMMENSE grief as they'd
locate everything that they needed because it was stored where it belongs.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:23:23 +0200, John Smith wrote:
> What a stupid poster YOU are!

I'm sorry. What is your point?
Of what did I state to which you object?

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:27:10 +0000, Chris Game wrote:
>> ...most of us would prefer Firefox over K-Meleon, Safari, Opera,
>> Netscape, SeaMonkey, OffbyOne, etc.
>
> I don't think so!

Which do you prefer? And why?

>> Unless a client tells me otherwise, I would never install software
>> that duplicates those offered with the basic Windows install.
>> Windows comes with a good basic word processor. Most newbie users
>> don't have a need for Excel or PowerPoint substitutes. And if they
>> did, only then would I install
>
> Agree with you wholeheartedly. EVERYONE needs a "word processor" but
> not everyone needs Excel or PowerPoint replacements. I do agree now
> that you've clarified that position.
>
> Yes, for basic word processing, the Word-like "freeware" (more like
> "existware") should suffice for a newbie.
>
>>>>> - Email with Thunderbird if you use a POP server
>>> You must have a POP/IMAP client.
>>> It doesn't have to be Thunderbird
>> The basic Windows install comes with Outlook Express
>
> Actually this is also a great point. Personally, I've set up many POP3
> clients yet every time I come across Outlook Express, it wants to
> connect and create some bloated thing called Exchange.

Something must have gone wrong in your configuration of OE because I've
never known anyone to have the problem you described.

>> As their installation tech it's your job to lock down IE to make it
>> reasonably secure. No need to add redundant software they didn't ask
>> for. And firefox has its security issues also.
>
> If the customer is OK with IE, then I guess that's a fine suggestion.
> Personally, I can't stand anything that doesn't wipe out my cookies
> the moment I close the browser and that which doesn't stop every
> popup and that which doesn't have all the plugins that I've grown to
> love and need. However, for very basic user, I agree with you that
> Internet Explorer should suffice.

IE has a native popup stopper. It also allows the user to manually
delete cookies. Beyond that, you're projecting your preference of
Firefox onto your client and I don't think that's fair to your client.

>> Substituting a different Flash player will only confuse a newbie due
>> to lack of browser integration. Macromedia's Flash player is not
>> bloatware anyway.
>
> Maybe. It certainly isn't as bad as RealPlayer, for example. Or
> Quicktime. Again, my personal distastes may have clouded my
> judgement. I can't think of a single swf or flv file that *ever* was
> needed, so, I think I'm objecting more to the content than to the
> format and resultant player. We can all get along without a single
> flv file and never be the wiser.

Again, I think you're projecting your software preferences onto your
client's computer. Your client might have no problem with Flash.

>> Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
>> computer.
> If they're gonna use Windows Media Player, they're muuuuch better off
> with Media Player Classic which starts up faster, much simpler
> interface, doesn't try to sell you anything, and can play anything
> that is worth playing. This is a no brainer. Remove WMP the moment it
> first comes up!

>> Some websites won't automatically play mov files if Quicktime is not
>> installed.
>
> They will if Quicktime Alternative is installed properly.
>
>> Newbies aren't interested in software politics. If they want to play
>> a RealPlayer file they'll probably let their browser install it
>> anyway.
>
> I hate RealPlayer more than I hate IE so I have trouble with this one.
> Still, I understand your logic and, for those who can't discern as
> you and I can, they just might be able to get along with RealPlayer
> without slitting their wrists in desperation.

Why not just set their RealPlayer configuration to not be so meddlesome?
Same goes for WMP and Quicktime.

>> Or they could use Windows Media Player to play the files on their
>> computer, or use the software that came with their IPod.
> No software comes with an iPod. The iTunes program is total bloatware
> crap, forcing upon you the arbitrary rules and regulations of Apple
> which you have no need to be bound by (many a person has lost their
> entire music collection, for example, due to the propensity of iTunes
> to synchronize that which no longer exists on your system - the
> google record proves that one out in spades).

I'll take your word for it since I don't own an IPod.

>> Overall, it's presumptuous to inject your software politics onto a
>> newbie's system. Let them take advantage of their native software. As
>> they become more savvy they can add new software on their own.
>
> Hmmmm... maybe. Maybe not. The whole point is WE have the experience
> to make the newbie's life better. Simple things we can teach them
> will give them immense leverage.

That carries a risk if, as they get wiser, they don't like some of the
decisions you made for their computer.

> For example, "don't put anything into a directory with a space in the
> name" is a simple way to teach them to organize their system the way
> THEY want to organize it; not the way Microsoft and brand-loving
> companies do. For example, the "Documents and Settings" directory is
> filled with so much branded crap that you can never organize it.

The risk there is that some programs expect spaces in some system folder
names, and will automatically create those folders if they can't find
them on the system. Then the newbie might not know where to find their
files. I would leave the folder names alone.

> Same with the idiotic "Program Files" directory. Who on earth installs
> software by brand name anyway? That's ridiculous. Software has always
> been best organized by function. Ask any UNIX guru, for example. They
> forgot more about operating systems than any Windows user ever knew.
> They would NEVER organize a software hierarchy by company name, not
> in a million years.

But some software patches will automatically look for their directory
using their default names. That might cause trouble or confusion for an
unsure newbie. I don't have any problem changing the default drive or
partition letter, but I'd leave the default installation directory names
alone on a newbie's system. As far as company name directories, I'd
leave those alone too even though I agree with your sentiments,
especially for no-name companies that have just one software product.

> So, in summary, it's OUR JOB to set the newbies up right.

Even though I personally follow some of your practices, I think some of
your changes from the norm might cause trouble ahead for a newbie.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:25:39 -0600, M.L. wrote:
>> For example, "don't put anything into a directory with a space in the
>> name"
>
> The risk there is that some programs expect spaces

Hi M.L.,
You are very reasonable in all your responses so I will take the time to
clarify this one - as your response was aimed at the space but my point was
aimed at the organizational aspect of the problem.

The "don't ever put anything in a directory with a space in the name" axiom
has nothing to do with the name of the folder. That axiom to live by is
just an easy way for a newbie to remember NEVER put ANYTHING into "Program
Files" or "Documents or Settings" or "System Volume Information" etc.

The reason is that those Microsoft-supplied directories are HOPELESSLY
disorganized from the start - and - worse yet - even if you ever manage to
clean them up properly (which I've painstakingly done many times) - they
will never behave no matter what you do.

For example, in the past I changed the "%%PROGRAMFILE" variable (off the
top of my head) in the registry to point to my true program files directory
and, would you believe it, a disorganized clutter of directories (e.g.,
"Common Files" and the like) filled my otherwise clean and organized
hierarchy.

Likewise, I used to change the documents directory only to find, much to my
chagrin, tons and tons of useless clutter filling up my otherwise clean
hierarchy. And, I used to try to manage the "Start Menu" hierarchy, to
laborously clean out the readme shortcuts (aka links) and all the links to
the documentation and even put all the uninstallers in their own hierarchy,
etc. - only to be defeated time and time again by the idiotic installers
themselves.

Now, I install everything into c:\programs and below that are a dozen well
organized hierarchies by function (browsers, editors, mailers, players,
etc.) and below that there is a third (often) hierarchy of the types of,
for example, editors, e.g., picture, video, audio, web, pdf, etc.

Since the "official" programfiles directory is C:\program files, all the
installers gracefully avoid filling up my "true" programs directory with
crap. Same with my "true" documents directory (i.e., c:\documents) and my
installation hierarchy (c:\installers) and my downloads hierarchy
(c:\downloads).

So, in summary, my point which has helped MANY a newbie who has thanked me
profusely once they realize the simple inescapeable wisdom of it all is
"never install into nor try to organize a directory that Microsoft and
other programs are going to fill with crap because it just isn't worth the
trouble to keep it organized".

But, it's easier for them to remember the simpler, if less accurate axiom
NEVER PUT ANYTHING IN A DIRECTORY THAT HAS A SPACE IN THE NAME!

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:25:39 -0600, M.L. wrote:
> Even though I personally follow some of your practices, I think some of
> your changes from the norm might cause trouble ahead for a newbie.

Hi M.L.
Since you are the voice of reason, maybe I can ask you to review my
personal hierarchy that I use on MY system? I have no problems with
well-written software installing in the locations of my choice. The
software that isn't well behaved, I delete.

I always adhere to the simple golden rule of knowing where something is
going to go before I install it. I also always know where it will put its
data before I use it. Where things go and put data are always known AHEAD
of time.

Here is the simple where-they-go rule, for example:
RULE #1: Maintain the SAME hierarchy in these three locations
LOCATION #1: Your programs hierarchy
LOCATION #2: Your menu hierarchy
LOCATION #3: Your installers hierarchy

What I mean by that is, for example, say you were to download multiple
browsers. You would organize them by function (i.e., browsing) and then by
name (i.e., ie, firefox, k-meleon, netscape, opera, safari, seamonkey,
offbyone, etc.).

You do this in all three places (installers, programs, menus).

To clarify ...
STEP 1:
You would save the downloaded installers in c:\installers, e.g.,
c:\installers\browsers\ie
c:\installers\browsers\firefox
c:\installers\browsers\k-meleon
c:\installers\browsers\netscape
c:\installers\browsers\opera
c:\installers\browsers\safari
c:\installers\browsers\seamonkey
c:\installers\browsers\offbyone
c:\installers\browsers\utorrent
c:\installers\browsers\itunes
c:\installers\browsers\limewire
etc.

STEP 2:
When you install, ALWAYS HIT THE CUSTOM CHOICE (never ever let the program
install with the defaults!!!!!!!!!!!!). Guess how you organize the
programs? Yup. Exactly the same!
c:\programs\browsers\ie
c:\programs\browsers\firefox
c:\programs\browsers\k-meleon
c:\programs\browsers\netscape
c:\programs\browsers\opera
c:\programs\browsers\safari
c:\programs\browsers\seamonkey
c:\programs\browsers\offbyone
c:\programs\browsers\utorrent
c:\programs\browsers\itunes
c:\programs\browsers\limewire
etc.

STEP 3:
Your menu hierarchy should reflect the SAME organization, so, here is the
one exception to the golden rule of never putting anything into a directory
with a space in it. Keep your menus the same!
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\ie
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\firefox
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\k-meleon
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\netscape
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\opera
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\safari
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\seamonkey
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\offbyone
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\utorrent
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\itunes
c:\documents and settings\donna\start menu\programs\browsers\limewire
etc.

My argument is this simple golden rule for newbies and experts alike is the
single most important way to keep your computer under control. I've seen
those newbies who follow this golden rule have way more understanding and
congtrol of their PC! Just by following these simple golden rules.

It's amazing isn't it? And it's our little secret.

One gotcha I must admit is that I'm forced to put the menus in a directory
that has a space in the name.

QUESTION FOR EXPERTS ONLY:
How does one maintain a Start Menu menu called "programs" without putting
ANYTHING in the "Documents and Settings" directory. Is that possible with a
registry tweak?