Re: Spell Corrected: MSFT Connect Officially Rejects Public Access to Bugs/Sam-R

Correction:

Spelling:


No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area you
don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the condescending,
dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also eagerly look
forward to the large volume of help you plan to post here--someday.

My premise has been this:


MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver health
and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.

My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:

1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer
feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing Connect
access to bugs. They make
the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom and
McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote sales
of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.

2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
place
on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
available in KBs you haven't seen.

3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on
their site.

The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a lot
of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.

4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
"security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only laptops
and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week does.

5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get product
keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people told
repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that they post
questions without doing a search on the group--they probably don't know it
exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the MSFT communnity
instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here are asked hundreds of
times because people are to lazy to search the answers that most of us have
answered hundreds of times who do the answering.

I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too
lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the more
imperative to up the level of education.

I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize their
products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on MSFT's site
on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was for XP at the
stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001 before the Windows
XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used Help
and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new Help
server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in Vista
should they need it.

If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born in
California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
sophisticated level you're accustomed to.

I want to make it very clear.

I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms to
customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is
Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as "Recovery."

The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach Win
RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the recovery
discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the chief
modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.

I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:

You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls
you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and DVDs.
We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
what we each have to use.

You game? Bring it.

[Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been made
here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
clarification until you can comprehend it.]

Best regards,

CH



"Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
news:...
> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>
> My premise has been this:
>
>
> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
> health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>
> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>
> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer
> feedback from the public.
> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to
> promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't
> fix.
>
>
> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>
> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on
> their site.
>
> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
> the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in the
> news this week does.
>
> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>
> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too
> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
> more imperative to up the level of education.
>
> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>
> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
> in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>
> I want to make it very clear.
>
> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is
> Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
> "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a
> nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners"
> big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. .
> They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that WILL
> NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP
> where the recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install
> which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced
> options fail.
>
> I have an additional challenge for you:
>
> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls
> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
> DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery
> with what we each have to use.
>
> You game? Bring it.
>
> CH
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>
>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving you
>>> any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>
>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately 110
>>> people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>
>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying to
>>> you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington, D.C.
>>>
>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>
>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and the
>>> CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any semblance of
>>> a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports by the public.
>>>
>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is
>>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>
>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture possible
>>> in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the learning curves
>>> of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>
>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged
>>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and those
>>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN they
>>> hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on line, and
>>> afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to hide them from
>>> the public.
>>>
>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>> hardly the case.
>>>
>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings on
>>> Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited Technet
>>> LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no more than
>>> 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>
>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there
>>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less in
>>> number, and the information is considerably less in quality with even
>>> more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>
>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into the
>>> MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>
>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT public
>>> websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and Technet blogs,
>>> but they are known and used by a limited number and subset of people.
>>>
>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone
>>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable help
>>> for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>
>>>
>>> Suggestion Category
>>>
>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Recommendation
>>>
>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>> sites.
>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That
>>> arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>> public customer base.
>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>> unfinished
>>>
>>>
>>> Suggestion Category
>>>
>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Recommendation
>>>
>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>
>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>
>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a central
>>> place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check
>>> them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That arms
>>> length approach would be pathetic.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>> public customer base.
>>>
>>>
>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>> unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS out the
>>> door.
>>>
>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that it
>>> "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>
>>>
>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick to
>>> your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the author of
>>> MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out, and runs too
>>> blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>
>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Hi Chad;
Upsetting people again; I see.
Daring to make waves? LOL
Dare I say; thinking out of the box?
Seems the tone of this thread;is making you a tad defensive!!!
Too funny; good to read ya though!!
BTW, an MSFT guy got back to me;about that Avast issue.
Still looking at it.

Jeff

"Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Correction:
>
> Spelling:
>
>
> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
> you
> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
> condescending, dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also
> eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
> here--someday.
>
> My premise has been this:
>
>
> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
> health
> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>
> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>
> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer
> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
> Connect access to bugs. They make
> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
> and
> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
> sales
> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>
> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
> place
> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>
> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on
> their site.
>
> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a lot
> of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>
> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
> laptops and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week
> does.
>
> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
> product
> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
> told repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that
> they post questions without doing a search on the group--they probably
> don't know it exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the
> MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here are
> asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the answers
> that most of us have answered hundreds of times who do the answering.
>
> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too
> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
> more
> imperative to up the level of education.
>
> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used Help
> and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new Help
> server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in Vista
> should they need it.
>
> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
> in
> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>
> I want to make it very clear.
>
> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is
> Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
> "Recovery."
>
> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
> conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
> Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
> recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach
> Win
> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
> recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the
> chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>
> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>
> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls
> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
> DVDs.
> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
> what we each have to use.
>
> You game? Bring it.
>
> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
> made here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>
> Best regards,
>
> CH
>
>
>
> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>>
>> My premise has been this:
>>
>>
>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>
>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>
>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> customer feedback from the public.
>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>> to promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>> didn't fix.
>>
>>
>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>> fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>
>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> on their site.
>>
>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>> the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in the
>> news this week does.
>>
>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>>
>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> too lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all
>> the more imperative to up the level of education.
>>
>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>>
>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
>> in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the
>> usual sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>
>> I want to make it very clear.
>>
>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
>> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a
>> nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners"
>> big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. .
>> They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that
>> WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win
>> XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install
>> which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced
>> options fail.
>>
>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>
>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> girls you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs
>> and DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to
>> recovery with what we each have to use.
>>
>> You game? Bring it.
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>
>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving you
>>>> any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately 110
>>>> people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>
>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>>>> to you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>>>> D.C.
>>>>
>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>
>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>>>> the CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any
>>>> semblance of a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports by
>>>> the public.
>>>>
>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is
>>>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture possible
>>>> in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the learning curves
>>>> of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>>
>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged
>>>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>>>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and those
>>>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>>>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>>>> they hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on line,
>>>> and afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to hide them
>>>> from the public.
>>>>
>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>>> hardly the case.
>>>>
>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>>>> on Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>>>> Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no
>>>> more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>
>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there
>>>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less in
>>>> number, and the information is considerably less in quality with even
>>>> more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>>>> the MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT public
>>>> websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and Technet blogs,
>>>> but they are known and used by a limited number and subset of people.
>>>>
>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone
>>>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable
>>>> help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>
>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Recommendation
>>>>
>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>>>> and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>> sites.
>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>> public customer base.
>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and
>>>> have them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>>> unfinished
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>
>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Recommendation
>>>>
>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>
>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a central
>>>> place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check
>>>> them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That arms
>>>> length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>> public customer base.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>>> unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS out
>>>> the door.
>>>>
>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that it
>>>> "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick
>>>> to your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the author
>>>> of MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out, and runs
>>>> too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>
>>>> CH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Chad,

MS usually waits until right before RTM to finalize all the help topics and
other related content. I think the reason that they haven't posted that kind
of stuff on their website is not that they don't want the public to know, I
think it's because Vista is still beta software and subject to change, they
wanna be sure that the documentation is right. I have and am participating
in other betas of MS software and they refresh the documentation often
because the code changes that often. If MS did that with Vista I think there
would be more confusion than there would be help. I know that you are upset
that the public feedback is not accessible but everything that I have been
told and that I have read from anyone of the Devs and Test team members that
I have talked to, they say the public beta has been extremely helpful. If
you are so concerned about getting a CD or DVD when you purchase a new
computer with Vista pay the extra 10-15 bucks that some of the OEMs are
charging for the DVD. Everything is not all Microsoft's fault, this is the
one thing the public does not understand. It is not entirely up to MS as to
what drivers are provided in-box, what software works right at RTM and they
can't control the speed at which some of the ISVs code their software for
Vista. If you are so concerned about the DVD, contact Dell or HP or whoever
you prefer and voice your complaint to them. Microsoft can only do so much
and then it goes to the hands of 3rd party companies to make their software
work with the OS.

Again on the subject of security, do you want code that your company has
worked on leaked to everyone when it's your intellectual property and it is
protected by laws all over the world. I don't think that it is right that
there are TechBeta members who all they do is distribute the Bits and
information to the warez sites. I know that if I had made a significant
investment in the product that brings my company most of our money, I would
not want it leaked and I would be very controlling as to the information
that was put out to the public.

Tom

"Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Correction:
>
> Spelling:
>
>
> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
> you
> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
> condescending, dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also
> eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
> here--someday.
>
> My premise has been this:
>
>
> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
> health
> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>
> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>
> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer
> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
> Connect access to bugs. They make
> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
> and
> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
> sales
> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>
> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
> place
> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>
> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on
> their site.
>
> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a lot
> of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>
> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
> laptops and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week
> does.
>
> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
> product
> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
> told repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that
> they post questions without doing a search on the group--they probably
> don't know it exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the
> MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here are
> asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the answers
> that most of us have answered hundreds of times who do the answering.
>
> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too
> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
> more
> imperative to up the level of education.
>
> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used Help
> and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new Help
> server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in Vista
> should they need it.
>
> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
> in
> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>
> I want to make it very clear.
>
> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is
> Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
> "Recovery."
>
> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
> conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
> Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
> recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach
> Win
> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
> recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the
> chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>
> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>
> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls
> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
> DVDs.
> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
> what we each have to use.
>
> You game? Bring it.
>
> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
> made here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>
> Best regards,
>
> CH
>
>
>
> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>>
>> My premise has been this:
>>
>>
>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>
>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>
>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> customer feedback from the public.
>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>> to promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>> didn't fix.
>>
>>
>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>> fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>
>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> on their site.
>>
>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>> the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in the
>> news this week does.
>>
>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>>
>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> too lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all
>> the more imperative to up the level of education.
>>
>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>>
>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
>> in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the
>> usual sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>
>> I want to make it very clear.
>>
>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
>> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a
>> nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners"
>> big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. .
>> They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that
>> WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win
>> XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install
>> which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced
>> options fail.
>>
>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>
>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> girls you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs
>> and DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to
>> recovery with what we each have to use.
>>
>> You game? Bring it.
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>
>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving you
>>>> any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>>
>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately 110
>>>> people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>
>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>>>> to you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>>>> D.C.
>>>>
>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>
>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>>>> the CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any
>>>> semblance of a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports by
>>>> the public.
>>>>
>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is
>>>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture possible
>>>> in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the learning curves
>>>> of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>>
>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged
>>>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>>>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and those
>>>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>>>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>>>> they hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on line,
>>>> and afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to hide them
>>>> from the public.
>>>>
>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>>> hardly the case.
>>>>
>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>>>> on Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>>>> Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no
>>>> more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>
>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there
>>>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less in
>>>> number, and the information is considerably less in quality with even
>>>> more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>>>> the MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>>
>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT public
>>>> websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and Technet blogs,
>>>> but they are known and used by a limited number and subset of people.
>>>>
>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone
>>>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable
>>>> help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>
>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Recommendation
>>>>
>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>>>> and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>> sites.
>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>> public customer base.
>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and
>>>> have them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>>> unfinished
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>
>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Recommendation
>>>>
>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>
>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a central
>>>> place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check
>>>> them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That arms
>>>> length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>> public customer base.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about 50
>>>> days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half baked
>>>> unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS out
>>>> the door.
>>>>
>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that it
>>>> "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick
>>>> to your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the author
>>>> of MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out, and runs
>>>> too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>
>>>> CH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

LOL--Thanks Jeff.

They're smart. It wouldn't kill them or stop the Porsches from piling
into their grarages and the Plasmas and spiffy toys in their households from
streaming in by the bucketful to supply a genuine Vista DVD to their
syncophantic customers.

MSFT knows when they are screwing people over. The marketing and cheap
worthless tech support they provide and lack of a recovery mechanism for
their 20% increased OEM sales last quarter and 20% decreased retail sales
according to the financial report Ballmer discussed in NYC and DC is very
profitable.

It's enabled many of them to be very productive in the philanthropic realm,
even giving Billy Gates an incentive to learn a little basic medicine.

Notice that not one of them has dared to respond. None of the "setup studs
or studesses" will take my challenge of me against them, Allchin, Gates,
and anyone they want to bring with their laptops and kickass tablets s and
the shitty media they craft a deal with via their non-engineer accountant
Scott Di Valeriano for OEMs to shove at people, and take me on with a
retail Vista DVD.


We'll take out a few files like ntldr Vista's boot strap mechanism
components and see which one of us--the softies from the setup team and
their hot dogs or me wins the contest of fixing a no boot Vista time after
time. My point--they don't give a damn whether their customers can recover
a no boot Vista and Startup Repair btw is not near as successful
statistically as a Repair Install in XP--and they don't want to talk about
the features that Desmond Lee PM cut out of Win RE that were promised a year
ago.

My point there is they screw people conjointly with OEMs in a really
important area--Gates is studying medicine heavily now to help his
foundation with HIV so in terms Gates can understand when Vista needs CPR
they deprive Vista of the crashcart and send it to the hospital morgue and
don't give people a chance with OEM crappy recovery discs and partitions and
whoops NO VISTA RETAIL DVD WITH THEIR $1000-3500 spiffy duo core or quad
core new Vista Capable boxes to recover.

They may be Vista Capable, but they sure aren't capable of recovering Vista
from a no boot without a retail DVD. They pullled the same thing for 6
years in XP.

You won't see their syncophantic cheerleader Nick White from the Vista
Launch team ( or what I call the kick the pig out the door fast and put some
Sinofsky rouge and lipstick from his purse on -- letting out a peep on this
or any of them. It's the dirty little secret they are afraid to talk about.

Any softie from the setup team who wants to challenge this, Darrrell Gorter
where are ya baby, speak up.

I'll betcha in the US of America all those SUV gas guzzling makers who are
now on the ropes having funded terrorism at both ends as Tom Friedman NYT
says, and put crisp Franklins into the hands of Hezbollah from the gas pumps
of America to drive the equivalant of the polo horsie on their proud chests,
wish that their customers were such synchophants that they will defend MSFT
the way Ann Coulter defends mass killing and stay the course.

Ole Maria Cantwell now finds herself in a race out in Redmond land with her
Republican opponent for her "stay the course" irrationality. She has no
coherent explanation that's even remotely articulate for it either. But
affluent white girls who ran Real rarely send their kids to Iraq. No one
in Maria's family is anywhere near it. She's bravely fighting the war from
Georgetown bistros.

http://cantwell.senate.gov/maria/

CH





CH



CH
"Jeff" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi Chad;
> Upsetting people again; I see.
> Daring to make waves? LOL
> Dare I say; thinking out of the box?
> Seems the tone of this thread;is making you a tad defensive!!!
> Too funny; good to read ya though!!
> BTW, an MSFT guy got back to me;about that Avast issue.
> Still looking at it.
>
> Jeff
>
> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Correction:
>>
>> Spelling:
>>
>>
>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> you
>> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> condescending, dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also
>> eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
>> here--someday.
>>
>> My premise has been this:
>>
>>
>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> health
>> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>
>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>
>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> customer
>> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
>> Connect access to bugs. They make
>> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
>> and
>> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
>> sales
>> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>
>> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> place
>> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
>> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>
>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> on
>> their site.
>>
>> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a
>> lot of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>>
>> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
>> laptops and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week
>> does.
>>
>> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> product
>> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
>> told repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that
>> they post questions without doing a search on the group--they probably
>> don't know it exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the
>> MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here
>> are asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the
>> answers that most of us have answered hundreds of times who do the
>> answering.
>>
>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> too
>> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
>> more
>> imperative to up the level of education.
>>
>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
>> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
>> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used
>> Help and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new
>> Help server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in
>> Vista should they need it.
>>
>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
>> in
>> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
>> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>
>> I want to make it very clear.
>>
>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
>> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> "Recovery."
>>
>> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
>> conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
>> Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
>> recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach
>> Win
>> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
>> recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the
>> chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options
>> fail.
>>
>> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>>
>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> girls
>> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
>> DVDs.
>> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
>> what we each have to use.
>>
>> You game? Bring it.
>>
>> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
>> made here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
>> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>>> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>>> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>>>
>>> My premise has been this:
>>>
>>>
>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>>> health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>>
>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>>
>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>>> customer feedback from the public.
>>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>>> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>>> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>>> to promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>>> didn't fix.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>>> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>>> fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>
>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>>> on their site.
>>>
>>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education
>>> in the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in
>>> the news this week does.
>>>
>>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>>> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>>> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>>>
>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>>> too lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all
>>> the more imperative to up the level of education.
>>>
>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>>>
>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was
>>> born in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to
>>> the usual sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>>
>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>
>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The
>>> major repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif
>>> component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower
>>> left as "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD
>>> due to a nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name
>>> partners" big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things
>>> computers. . They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden
>>> partitions that WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same
>>> arrangement in Win XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not
>>> do a repair install which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP
>>> after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>>>
>>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>>
>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>>> girls you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs
>>> and DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to
>>> recovery with what we each have to use.
>>>
>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>>
>>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving
>>>>> you any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately
>>>>> 110 people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>>
>>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>>>>> to you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>>>>> D.C.
>>>>>
>>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>>
>>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>>>>> the CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any
>>>>> semblance of a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports
>>>>> by the public.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is
>>>>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture
>>>>> possible in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the
>>>>> learning curves of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged
>>>>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>>>>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and those
>>>>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>>>>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>>>>> they hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on
>>>>> line, and afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to
>>>>> hide them from the public.
>>>>>
>>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>>>> hardly the case.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>>>>> on Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>>>>> Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no
>>>>> more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there
>>>>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less
>>>>> in number, and the information is considerably less in quality with
>>>>> even more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>>>>> the MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT
>>>>> public websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and
>>>>> Technet blogs, but they are known and used by a limited number and
>>>>> subset of people.
>>>>>
>>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone
>>>>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable
>>>>> help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>
>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>>>>> and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>> sites.
>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend
>>>>> to give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the
>>>>> unwashed public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250
>>>>> million and growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the
>>>>> European Union (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is
>>>>> systemically branded on this policy that is going to generate
>>>>> untrained Vista users in your public customer base.
>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and
>>>>> have them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not
>>>>> some pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are
>>>>> about 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this
>>>>> half baked unfinished
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>
>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>> sites.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check
>>>>> them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That
>>>>> arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>>> public customer base.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about
>>>>> 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half
>>>>> baked unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS
>>>>> out the door.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that
>>>>> it "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick
>>>>> to your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the
>>>>> author of MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out,
>>>>> and runs too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>>
>>>>> CH
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Tom--

I appreciated your nice clear, well formatted post on RC1. It's
unfortunate that this glut of duplicate questions won't read it. I posted
similar material. I remember there was another reference post you had
promised, and I mean to check it out. MSFT has done some nice directions on
release notes, but I wish they would put up an explicit Vista setup and burn
page including dual boot, etc. I know Nick White put up directions, but
Nick's were from the standpoint of remote installs that are often done at
MSFT where builds change every day or even more frequently.

I've tried to post some help steps in that vein but hordes of people refuse
to read them and keep posting for their individual spoon feed.

I caught your paragraph on bits and security, propitiary concerns and
Warez sites. I truly fail to see how anything in an educational vein I have
pushed for--geeze Louise--has any impact on any area that compromises MSFT's
security as to their product, their code, their intellectual property or any
of the area where Nancy Anderson, Deputy General Counsel who heads up
their piracy litigation and the rest of the boys and girls who heads up
their litigation and managed to lose them about a half a million bucks and
growing in the European litigation are concerned.

As to distribution of bits and torrents, it might surprise you to enlarge
your scope because some of those may come from the Redmond campus not TBTs,
TAP, or MVP testers. And frankly in that vein, I think the boys who make
the big bucks are glad to see Beta Vista or any Beta OS on any box it can
get during beta, whether the dog drags it home and installs it, or however
it gets on. Beta builds on boxes have nothing to do with MSFT losing code
to companies or individuals competing with it. It's a little like the old
adage, "I don't care what you say about me but spell my name right." MSFT
wants Beta Vista on as many boxes as possible. That's why they are giving it
away. It's called Sales promotion and product recognition, and momentum
toward RTM pure and simple.


All Star MSFT Legal Team who Lost Nearly Half a Million and Growing during
the recent European Union Litigation:

/s/ Charles F. Rule
CHARLES F. RULE (D.C. Bar No. 370818)
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 800
Washington, DC 20004-2505
(202) 639-7300


BRADFORD L. SMITH
MARY SNAPP
DAVID A. HEINER, JR.
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, Washington 98052
425/936-8080

STEVE L. HOLLEY
RICHARD C. PEPPERMAN II
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
125 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004
(212) 558-4000
Counsel for Defendant
Microsoft Corporation

BRADFORD L. SMITH
MARY SNAPP
DAVID A. HEINER, JR.
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, Washington 98052
425/936-8080

CH


"Tom Ziegmann" <> wrote in message
news:e%2396FL%...
> Chad,
>
> MS usually waits until right before RTM to finalize all the help topics
> and
> other related content. I think the reason that they haven't posted that
> kind
> of stuff on their website is not that they don't want the public to know,
> I
> think it's because Vista is still beta software and subject to change,
> they
> wanna be sure that the documentation is right. I have and am participating
> in other betas of MS software and they refresh the documentation often
> because the code changes that often. If MS did that with Vista I think
> there
> would be more confusion than there would be help. I know that you are
> upset
> that the public feedback is not accessible but everything that I have been
> told and that I have read from anyone of the Devs and Test team members
> that
> I have talked to, they say the public beta has been extremely helpful. If
> you are so concerned about getting a CD or DVD when you purchase a new
> computer with Vista pay the extra 10-15 bucks that some of the OEMs are
> charging for the DVD. Everything is not all Microsoft's fault, this is the
> one thing the public does not understand. It is not entirely up to MS as
> to
> what drivers are provided in-box, what software works right at RTM and
> they
> can't control the speed at which some of the ISVs code their software for
> Vista. If you are so concerned about the DVD, contact Dell or HP or
> whoever
> you prefer and voice your complaint to them. Microsoft can only do so much
> and then it goes to the hands of 3rd party companies to make their
> software
> work with the OS.
>
> Again on the subject of security, do you want code that your company has
> worked on leaked to everyone when it's your intellectual property and it
> is
> protected by laws all over the world. I don't think that it is right that
> there are TechBeta members who all they do is distribute the Bits and
> information to the warez sites. I know that if I had made a significant
> investment in the product that brings my company most of our money, I
> would
> not want it leaked and I would be very controlling as to the information
> that was put out to the public.
>
> Tom
>
> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Correction:
>>
>> Spelling:
>>
>>
>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> you
>> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> condescending, dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also
>> eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
>> here--someday.
>>
>> My premise has been this:
>>
>>
>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> health
>> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>
>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>
>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> customer
>> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
>> Connect access to bugs. They make
>> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
>> and
>> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
>> sales
>> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>
>> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> place
>> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
>> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>
>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> on
>> their site.
>>
>> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a
>> lot of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>>
>> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
>> laptops and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week
>> does.
>>
>> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> product
>> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
>> told repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that
>> they post questions without doing a search on the group--they probably
>> don't know it exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the
>> MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here
>> are asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the
>> answers that most of us have answered hundreds of times who do the
>> answering.
>>
>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> too
>> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
>> more
>> imperative to up the level of education.
>>
>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
>> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
>> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used
>> Help and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new
>> Help server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in
>> Vista should they need it.
>>
>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
>> in
>> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
>> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>
>> I want to make it very clear.
>>
>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
>> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> "Recovery."
>>
>> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
>> conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
>> Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
>> recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach
>> Win
>> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
>> recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the
>> chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options
>> fail.
>>
>> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>>
>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> girls
>> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
>> DVDs.
>> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
>> what we each have to use.
>>
>> You game? Bring it.
>>
>> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
>> made here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
>> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>>> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>>> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>>>
>>> My premise has been this:
>>>
>>>
>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>>> health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>>
>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>>
>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>>> customer feedback from the public.
>>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>>> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>>> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>>> to promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>>> didn't fix.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>>> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>>> fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>
>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>>> on their site.
>>>
>>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education
>>> in the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in
>>> the news this week does.
>>>
>>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>>> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>>> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>>>
>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>>> too lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all
>>> the more imperative to up the level of education.
>>>
>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>>>
>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was
>>> born in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to
>>> the usual sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>>
>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>
>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The
>>> major repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif
>>> component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower
>>> left as "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD
>>> due to a nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name
>>> partners" big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things
>>> computers. . They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden
>>> partitions that WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same
>>> arrangement in Win XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not
>>> do a repair install which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP
>>> after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>>>
>>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>>
>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>>> girls you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs
>>> and DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to
>>> recovery with what we each have to use.
>>>
>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>>
>>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving
>>>>> you any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately
>>>>> 110 people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>>
>>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>>>>> to you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>>>>> D.C.
>>>>>
>>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>>
>>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>>>>> the CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any
>>>>> semblance of a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports
>>>>> by the public.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is
>>>>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture
>>>>> possible in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the
>>>>> learning curves of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged
>>>>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>>>>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and those
>>>>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>>>>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>>>>> they hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on
>>>>> line, and afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to
>>>>> hide them from the public.
>>>>>
>>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>>>> hardly the case.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>>>>> on Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>>>>> Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no
>>>>> more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there
>>>>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less
>>>>> in number, and the information is considerably less in quality with
>>>>> even more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>>>>> the MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT
>>>>> public websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and
>>>>> Technet blogs, but they are known and used by a limited number and
>>>>> subset of people.
>>>>>
>>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone
>>>>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable
>>>>> help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>
>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>>>>> and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>> sites.
>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend
>>>>> to give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the
>>>>> unwashed public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250
>>>>> million and growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the
>>>>> European Union (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is
>>>>> systemically branded on this policy that is going to generate
>>>>> untrained Vista users in your public customer base.
>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and
>>>>> have them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not
>>>>> some pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are
>>>>> about 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this
>>>>> half baked unfinished
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>
>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>
>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>> sites.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check
>>>>> them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That
>>>>> arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded on
>>>>> this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your
>>>>> public customer base.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about
>>>>> 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half
>>>>> baked unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS
>>>>> out the door.
>>>>>
>>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that
>>>>> it "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick
>>>>> to your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the
>>>>> author of MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out,
>>>>> and runs too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>>
>>>>> CH
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Just for you, Chad.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Gives Bonuses to Execs

The bonuses must be rewards for shipping all those great products on
time. This week, Microsoft handed out almost $1 billion worth of
stock-based bonuses to more than 900 company executives. Eight top
executives took home a total of $81.4 million, with the highest bonus-
-$22.5 million--going to Microsoft Business Division President Jeff
Raikes. Other massive payouts include $8.4 million to Entertainment
and Devices Division President Robert Bach, $4.5 million to Human
Resources Senior Vice President Lisa Brummel, $18 million to Platforms
Group Co-President Kevin Johnson, $3.8 million to CFO Christopher
Liddell, $7.1 million to General Counsel Brad Smith, and $16.2 million
to COO Kevin Turner. Sadly, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer don't receive
bonuses under the company's compensation program. I hope they've saved
up enough for retirement.


"Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
news:%23GtMOS%...
> LOL--Thanks Jeff.
>
> They're smart. It wouldn't kill them or stop the Porsches from piling into their grarages
> and the Plasmas and spiffy toys in their households from streaming in by the bucketful to
> supply a genuine Vista DVD to their syncophantic customers.
>
> MSFT knows when they are screwing people over. The marketing and cheap worthless tech
> support they provide and lack of a recovery mechanism for their 20% increased OEM sales last
> quarter and 20% decreased retail sales according to the financial report Ballmer discussed in
> NYC and DC is very profitable.
>
> It's enabled many of them to be very productive in the philanthropic realm, even giving Billy
> Gates an incentive to learn a little basic medicine.
>
> Notice that not one of them has dared to respond. None of the "setup studs or studesses"
> will take my challenge of me against them, Allchin, Gates, and anyone they want to bring with
> their laptops and kickass tablets s and the shitty media they craft a deal with via their
> non-engineer accountant Scott Di Valeriano for OEMs to shove at people, and take me on with
> a retail Vista DVD.
>
>
> We'll take out a few files like ntldr Vista's boot strap mechanism components and see which
> one of us--the softies from the setup team and their hot dogs or me wins the contest of
> fixing a no boot Vista time after time. My point--they don't give a damn whether their
> customers can recover a no boot Vista and Startup Repair btw is not near as successful
> statistically as a Repair Install in XP--and they don't want to talk about the features that
> Desmond Lee PM cut out of Win RE that were promised a year ago.
>
> My point there is they screw people conjointly with OEMs in a really important area--Gates is
> studying medicine heavily now to help his foundation with HIV so in terms Gates can
> understand when Vista needs CPR they deprive Vista of the crashcart and send it to the
> hospital morgue and don't give people a chance with OEM crappy recovery discs and partitions
> and whoops NO VISTA RETAIL DVD WITH THEIR $1000-3500 spiffy duo core or quad core new Vista
> Capable boxes to recover.
>
> They may be Vista Capable, but they sure aren't capable of recovering Vista from a no boot
> without a retail DVD. They pullled the same thing for 6 years in XP.
>
> You won't see their syncophantic cheerleader Nick White from the Vista Launch team ( or what
> I call the kick the pig out the door fast and put some Sinofsky rouge and lipstick from his
> purse on -- letting out a peep on this or any of them. It's the dirty little secret they are
> afraid to talk about.
>
> Any softie from the setup team who wants to challenge this, Darrrell Gorter where are ya
> baby, speak up.
>
> I'll betcha in the US of America all those SUV gas guzzling makers who are now on the ropes
> having funded terrorism at both ends as Tom Friedman NYT says, and put crisp Franklins into
> the hands of Hezbollah from the gas pumps of America to drive the equivalant of the polo
> horsie on their proud chests, wish that their customers were such synchophants that they will
> defend MSFT the way Ann Coulter defends mass killing and stay the course.
>
> Ole Maria Cantwell now finds herself in a race out in Redmond land with her Republican
> opponent for her "stay the course" irrationality. She has no coherent explanation that's
> even remotely articulate for it either. But affluent white girls who ran Real rarely send
> their kids to Iraq. No one in Maria's family is anywhere near it. She's bravely fighting
> the war from Georgetown bistros.
>
> http://cantwell.senate.gov/maria/
>
> CH
>
>
>
>
>
> CH
>
>
>
> CH
> "Jeff" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hi Chad;
>> Upsetting people again; I see.
>> Daring to make waves? LOL
>> Dare I say; thinking out of the box?
>> Seems the tone of this thread;is making you a tad defensive!!!
>> Too funny; good to read ya though!!
>> BTW, an MSFT guy got back to me;about that Avast issue.
>> Still looking at it.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Correction:
>>>
>>> Spelling:
>>>
>>>
>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient comprehension. Try this.
>>> I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it
>>> more clearly in the area you
>>> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it translated. I aim to
>>> please you. I'm terribly honored by the condescending, dismissive tone of your question
>>> and glad to help. I also eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
>>> here--someday.
>>>
>>> My premise has been this:
>>>
>>>
>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver health
>>> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>>
>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>>
>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer
>>> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to
>>> bugs. They make
>>> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom and
>>> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote sales
>>> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>>
>>> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one place
>>> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
>>> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>
>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on
>>> their site.
>>>
>>> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a lot of detail that
>>> answers questions people continue to ask.
>>>
>>> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>>> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only laptops and no books
>>> in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week does.
>>>
>>> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>>> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get product
>>> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people told repeatedly how
>>> to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that they post questions without doing a
>>> search on the group--they probably don't know it exists and are using the crappy web
>>> interface made by the MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions
>>> here are asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the answers that most
>>> of us have answered hundreds of times who do the answering.
>>>
>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too
>>> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the more
>>> imperative to up the level of education.
>>>
>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain features and fix
>>> Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize their products are entitled to high
>>> qaulity Vista info. It isn't on MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista
>>> the way it was for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
>>> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
>>> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used Help and Support in
>>> XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new Help server for Vista as well as Guided
>>> Support's work in progress in Vista should they need it.
>>>
>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born in
>>> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
>>> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>>
>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>
>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms to customers of
>>> MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major repair modality for a no boot
>>> Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at
>>> the lower left as "Recovery."
>>>
>>> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy conjointly
>>> promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among
>>> other things computers. . They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden
>>> partitions that *WILL NOT* reach Win
>>> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the recovery discs and
>>> partitions would not do a repair install which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP
>>> after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>>>
>>> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>>>
>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls
>>> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and DVDs.
>>> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
>>> what we each have to use.
>>>
>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>
>>> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been made here Sam-R. I
>>> aim to please you and will be glad to refine the clarification until you can comprehend
>>> it.]
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message news:...
>>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint comprehension. Try this.
>>>> I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it
>>>> more clearly in the area you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll
>>>> get it translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the condescending tone of
>>>> your question and glad to help.
>>>>
>>>> My premise has been this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention they haven't been
>>>> able to fix major components like Device Manager since 1995. One of the major features of
>>>> devmgmt.msc is to validate driver health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver
>>>> chats.
>>>>
>>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>>>
>>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging customer feedback from
>>>> the public.
>>>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They make the Beta
>>>> available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner Edstrom and McCann Ericson
>>>> Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote sales of a product that is going
>>>> to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one place on ther sites
>>>> and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>>
>>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available on their site.
>>>>
>>>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol "security for their
>>>> beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously alluded to saying MSFT had "their own
>>>> reasons." It promotes education in the same way that MSFT's pilot school in
>>>> Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week does.
>>>>
>>>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much clearer u
>>>> nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get product keys which seems the
>>>> subject of endless obsession.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little too lazy to
>>>> navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the more imperative to up the
>>>> level of education.
>>>>
>>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain features and fix
>>>> Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize their products are entitled to high
>>>> qaulity Vista info. It isn't on MSFT's site on most of the major system features of
>>>> Vista the way it was for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of
>>>> 2005.
>>>>
>>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born in California,
>>>> so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual sophisticated level you're
>>>> accustomed to.
>>>>
>>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>>
>>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms to customers of
>>>> MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major repair modality for a no boot
>>>> Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at
>>>> the lower left as "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a
>>>> nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like Dell,
>>>> HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have recovery CDs and hidden
>>>> and non-hidden partitions that WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same
>>>> arrangement in Win XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair
>>>> install which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options
>>>> fail.
>>>>
>>>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>>>
>>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and girls you think are
>>>> superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and DVDs. We''ll put up some
>>>> substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with what we each have to use.
>>>>
>>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>>
>>>> CH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:...
>>>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public files as to bugs
>>>>>> should know they totally reject the idea of giving you any meaningful access to the bugs
>>>>>> filed on Connect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is available to anyone) to
>>>>>> suggest that they open bugs to the public as well as their Beta Chats and their Live
>>>>>> Meetings that approximately 110 people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I designated it public,
>>>>>> they took it private to hide it in keeping with the devious MSFT no-transparency culture
>>>>>> now fostered by the new Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning
>>>>>> over all your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying to you
>>>>>> about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington, D.C.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and the CPP by
>>>>>> restricting information from them and defeating any semblance of a learning curve.
>>>>>> Connect blocks access to bug reports by the public.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from contexting bugs,
>>>>>> seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what is deffered to "fix" and never will
>>>>>> be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture possible in contrast to
>>>>>> the Gates Foundation stomps all over the learning curves of their customers with respect
>>>>>> to Vista by
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is exchanged that only
>>>>>> approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in different groups including but
>>>>>> not restricted to TBT and TAP and those added in the last few months. Instead of
>>>>>> sensibly providing a central link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN they hide the chats.
>>>>>> Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on line, and afik the chats aren't under any
>>>>>> NDA. How inconsiderate to hide them from the public.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete applicants with creme
>>>>>> de la crem academic pedigress although this is hardly the case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their tables and toys in
>>>>>> their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings on Vista (I'm not talking about the
>>>>>> infrequent and question limited Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive
>>>>>> them. They have no more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and there is no reason to
>>>>>> do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less in number, and the information is
>>>>>> considerably less in quality with even more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and settings transfer
>>>>>> manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into the MSFT pockets from the public as
>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not lifted a finger to
>>>>>> publish comprehensive information on the MSFT public websites. Excellent information is
>>>>>> available on MSDN and Technet blogs, but they are known and used by a limited number and
>>>>>> subset of people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and Win RE in Vista on
>>>>>> any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to anyone with an interest in Windows who is
>>>>>> provides consistent considerable help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and showcase this
>>>>>> on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a central place and
>>>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check them for
>>>>>> adults who are interested on your public newsgroups. That arms length approach would be
>>>>>> pathetic.
>>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to give you bug
>>>>>> information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed public thinks. Your arrogance
>>>>>> that cost you nearly 250 million and growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with
>>>>>> the European Union (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded
>>>>>> on this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your public customer
>>>>>> base.
>>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have them post
>>>>>> comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some pathetic cheerleading manual
>>>>>> like the "Product Guide." You are about 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is
>>>>>> shoving this half baked unfinished
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and showcase this on
>>>>>> your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a central place and
>>>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to check them for adults
>>>>>> who are interested on your public newsgroups. That arms length approach would be
>>>>>> pathetic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to give you bug
>>>>>> information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed public thinks. Your arrogance
>>>>>> that cost you nearly 250 million and growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with
>>>>>> the European Union (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded
>>>>>> on this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in your public customer
>>>>>> base.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have them post
>>>>>> comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some pathetic cheerleading manual
>>>>>> like the "Product Guide." You are about 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is
>>>>>> shoving this half baked unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed OS
>>>>>> out the door.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that it "like so rocks."
>>>>>> That's crap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick to your current
>>>>>> time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the author of MSFT Press Windows Vista
>>>>>> Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out, and runs too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is
>>>>>> really like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and point out what
>>>>>> isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CH
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Chad,
About warez;
I have to agree;
It is to MSFT's benefit; to get as much exposure for Vista as possible.
Oh, and from an o.s. newbie;such as my self; seems other o.s.'s are now
building client apps right into the o.s.
No matter what people say; torrents are not going away; and in fact; going
more mainstream.

Jeff

"Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
news:OQmlkB$...
> Tom--
>
> I appreciated your nice clear, well formatted post on RC1. It's
> unfortunate that this glut of duplicate questions won't read it. I posted
> similar material. I remember there was another reference post you had
> promised, and I mean to check it out. MSFT has done some nice directions
> on release notes, but I wish they would put up an explicit Vista setup and
> burn page including dual boot, etc. I know Nick White put up directions,
> but Nick's were from the standpoint of remote installs that are often done
> at MSFT where builds change every day or even more frequently.
>
> I've tried to post some help steps in that vein but hordes of people
> refuse to read them and keep posting for their individual spoon feed.
>
> I caught your paragraph on bits and security, propitiary concerns and
> Warez sites. I truly fail to see how anything in an educational vein I
> have pushed for--geeze Louise--has any impact on any area that compromises
> MSFT's security as to their product, their code, their intellectual
> property or any of the area where Nancy Anderson, Deputy General Counsel
> who heads up their piracy litigation and the rest of the boys and girls
> who heads up their litigation and managed to lose them about a half a
> million bucks and growing in the European litigation are concerned.
>
> As to distribution of bits and torrents, it might surprise you to enlarge
> your scope because some of those may come from the Redmond campus not
> TBTs, TAP, or MVP testers. And frankly in that vein, I think the boys who
> make the big bucks are glad to see Beta Vista or any Beta OS on any box it
> can get during beta, whether the dog drags it home and installs it, or
> however it gets on. Beta builds on boxes have nothing to do with MSFT
> losing code to companies or individuals competing with it. It's a little
> like the old adage, "I don't care what you say about me but spell my name
> right." MSFT wants Beta Vista on as many boxes as possible. That's why
> they are giving it away. It's called Sales promotion and product
> recognition, and momentum toward RTM pure and simple.
>
>
> All Star MSFT Legal Team who Lost Nearly Half a Million and Growing during
> the recent European Union Litigation:
>
> /s/ Charles F. Rule
> CHARLES F. RULE (D.C. Bar No. 370818)
> Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP
> 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
> Suite 800
> Washington, DC 20004-2505
> (202) 639-7300
>
>
> BRADFORD L. SMITH
> MARY SNAPP
> DAVID A. HEINER, JR.
> Microsoft Corporation
> One Microsoft Way
> Redmond, Washington 98052
> 425/936-8080
>
> STEVE L. HOLLEY
> RICHARD C. PEPPERMAN II
> Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
> 125 Broad Street
> New York, NY 10004
> (212) 558-4000
> Counsel for Defendant
> Microsoft Corporation
>
> BRADFORD L. SMITH
> MARY SNAPP
> DAVID A. HEINER, JR.
> Microsoft Corporation
> One Microsoft Way
> Redmond, Washington 98052
> 425/936-8080
>
> CH
>
>
> "Tom Ziegmann" <> wrote in message
> news:e%2396FL%...
>> Chad,
>>
>> MS usually waits until right before RTM to finalize all the help topics
>> and
>> other related content. I think the reason that they haven't posted that
>> kind
>> of stuff on their website is not that they don't want the public to know,
>> I
>> think it's because Vista is still beta software and subject to change,
>> they
>> wanna be sure that the documentation is right. I have and am
>> participating
>> in other betas of MS software and they refresh the documentation often
>> because the code changes that often. If MS did that with Vista I think
>> there
>> would be more confusion than there would be help. I know that you are
>> upset
>> that the public feedback is not accessible but everything that I have
>> been
>> told and that I have read from anyone of the Devs and Test team members
>> that
>> I have talked to, they say the public beta has been extremely helpful. If
>> you are so concerned about getting a CD or DVD when you purchase a new
>> computer with Vista pay the extra 10-15 bucks that some of the OEMs are
>> charging for the DVD. Everything is not all Microsoft's fault, this is
>> the
>> one thing the public does not understand. It is not entirely up to MS as
>> to
>> what drivers are provided in-box, what software works right at RTM and
>> they
>> can't control the speed at which some of the ISVs code their software for
>> Vista. If you are so concerned about the DVD, contact Dell or HP or
>> whoever
>> you prefer and voice your complaint to them. Microsoft can only do so
>> much
>> and then it goes to the hands of 3rd party companies to make their
>> software
>> work with the OS.
>>
>> Again on the subject of security, do you want code that your company has
>> worked on leaked to everyone when it's your intellectual property and it
>> is
>> protected by laws all over the world. I don't think that it is right that
>> there are TechBeta members who all they do is distribute the Bits and
>> information to the warez sites. I know that if I had made a significant
>> investment in the product that brings my company most of our money, I
>> would
>> not want it leaked and I would be very controlling as to the information
>> that was put out to the public.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Correction:
>>>
>>> Spelling:
>>>
>>>
>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
>>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
>>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>>> you
>>> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>>> condescending, dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I
>>> also eagerly look forward to the large volume of help you plan to post
>>> here--someday.
>>>
>>> My premise has been this:
>>>
>>>
>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>>> health
>>> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>>
>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>>
>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>>> customer
>>> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
>>> Connect access to bugs. They make
>>> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
>>> and
>>> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
>>> sales
>>> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>>
>>> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in
>>> one place
>>> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
>>> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>
>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>>> on
>>> their site.
>>>
>>> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a
>>> lot of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>>>
>>> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education
>>> in
>>> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
>>> laptops and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week
>>> does.
>>>
>>> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>>> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>>> product
>>> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
>>> told repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that
>>> they post questions without doing a search on the group--they probably
>>> don't know it exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the
>>> MSFT communnity instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here
>>> are asked hundreds of times because people are to lazy to search the
>>> answers that most of us have answered hundreds of times who do the
>>> answering.
>>>
>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>>> too
>>> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
>>> more
>>> imperative to up the level of education.
>>>
>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was
>>> for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001
>>> before the Windows XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
>>> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used
>>> Help and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new
>>> Help server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in
>>> Vista should they need it.
>>>
>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was
>>> born in
>>> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
>>> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>>
>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>
>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>>> to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The
>>> major repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif
>>> component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower
>>> left as "Recovery."
>>>
>>> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty
>>> policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big
>>> guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They
>>> will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL
>>> NOT* reach Win
>>> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
>>> recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the
>>> chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options
>>> fail.
>>>
>>> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>>>
>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>>> girls
>>> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
>>> DVDs.
>>> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery
>>> with
>>> what we each have to use.
>>>
>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>
>>> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
>>> made here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
>>> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> CH
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>>>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>>>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>>>> you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get
>>>> it translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>>>> condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>>>>
>>>> My premise has been this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to
>>>> mention they haven't been able to fix major components like Device
>>>> Manager since 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to
>>>> validate driver health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver
>>>> chats.
>>>>
>>>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or
>>>> suscinct:
>>>>
>>>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>>>> customer feedback from the public.
>>>> However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>>>> make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>>>> Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>>>> to promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>>>> didn't fix.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>>>> place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>>>> fixes available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>>>
>>>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>>>> on their site.
>>>>
>>>> This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>>>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>>>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education
>>>> in the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in
>>>> the news this week does.
>>>>
>>>> I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>>>> clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>>>> product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>>>> too lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all
>>>> the more imperative to up the level of education.
>>>>
>>>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>>>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>>>> their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>>>> MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it
>>>> was for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of
>>>> 2005.
>>>>
>>>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was
>>>> born in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to
>>>> the usual sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>>>
>>>> I want to make it very clear.
>>>>
>>>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue
>>>> streasms to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes.
>>>> The major repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif
>>>> component is Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower
>>>> left as "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD
>>>> due to a nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name
>>>> partners" big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things
>>>> computers. . They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden
>>>> partitions that WILL NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same
>>>> arrangement in Win XP where the recovery discs and partitions would not
>>>> do a repair install which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP
>>>> after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>>>>
>>>> I have an additional challenge for you:
>>>>
>>>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>>>> girls you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP
>>>> CDs and DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as
>>>> to recovery with what we each have to use.
>>>>
>>>> You game? Bring it.
>>>>
>>>> CH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>>>> news:...
>>>>> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>>>>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:...
>>>>>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>>>>>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving
>>>>>> you any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>>>>>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>>>>>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately
>>>>>> 110 people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>>>>>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>>>>>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>>>>>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>>>>>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>>>>>> to you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>>>>>> D.C.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The suggestion complaint read:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>>>>>> the CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any
>>>>>> semblance of a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports
>>>>>> by the public.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>>>>>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what
>>>>>> is deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture
>>>>>> possible in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the
>>>>>> learning curves of their customers with respect to Vista by
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is
>>>>>> exchanged that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta
>>>>>> testors in different groups including but not restricted to TBT and
>>>>>> TAP and those added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly
>>>>>> providing a central link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>>>>>> they hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on
>>>>>> line, and afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to
>>>>>> hide them from the public.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>>>>>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>>>>>> hardly the case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>>>>>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>>>>>> on Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>>>>>> Technet LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have
>>>>>> no more than 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and
>>>>>> there is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably
>>>>>> less in number, and the information is considerably less in quality
>>>>>> with even more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>>>>>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>>>>>> the MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>>>>>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT
>>>>>> public websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and
>>>>>> Technet blogs, but they are known and used by a limited number and
>>>>>> subset of people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>>>>>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to
>>>>>> anyone with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent
>>>>>> considerable help for your customers on your newsgroups.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>>>>>> and showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>>> sites.
>>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend
>>>>>> to give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the
>>>>>> unwashed public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250
>>>>>> million and growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the
>>>>>> European Union (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is
>>>>>> systemically branded on this policy that is going to generate
>>>>>> untrained Vista users in your public customer base.
>>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and
>>>>>> have them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not
>>>>>> some pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are
>>>>>> about 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this
>>>>>> half baked unfinished
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestion Category
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Recommendation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place and
>>>>>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>>>>>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>>>>>> sites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>>>>>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>>>>>> That arms length approach would be pathetic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend to
>>>>>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>>>>>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and
>>>>>> growing fines after Brad Smith's litigation with the European Union
>>>>>> (make sure Brad gets a big Christmas bonus) is systemically branded
>>>>>> on this policy that is going to generate untrained Vista users in
>>>>>> your public customer base.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Get the Community writers on the Vista teams off their butts and have
>>>>>> them post comprehensive articles on the MSFT Vista sites, not some
>>>>>> pathetic cheerleading manual like the "Product Guide." You are about
>>>>>> 50 days from an October 25 Internal RTM which is shoving this half
>>>>>> baked unfinished and if anyone wants to see them RC1 replete flawed
>>>>>> OS out the door.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vista is not to use the MSFT synchophant mantra in the category that
>>>>>> it "like so rocks." That's crap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A more realistic take is the article by Ed Bott who says if you stick
>>>>>> to your current time table it will be horrendous. Ed Bott is the
>>>>>> author of MSFT Press Windows Vista Inside Out, Windows XP Inside Out,
>>>>>> and runs too blogs. Read them. Learn what Vista is really like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would be happy to go one on one with any one from Redmond MSFT and
>>>>>> point out what isn't being fixed in RC1 today."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CH
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

If you can understand it, spelling becomes secondary on a newsgroup, but it
is important.

OBGs (Oldie But Goodies) always rock. For the record Dell Corporation, a
very tiny computer company in Round Rock Texas that MSFT pays no attention
to because they are small and they don't sell many computers, has told
MSFT's eggregious OEM VP (who is not trained as a software engineer but is
an accountant or money counter) Scott DiValerio to "shove it" and is
shipping Vista DVDs with OEM pre-installed Vista.

See:

Bloatware, Operating System Discs and Dell Software Support or Dell's plans
to tell MSFT to stuff it and ship Vista full OS DVDs with their computers
http://www.direct2dell.com/one2one/a...0/17/3132.aspx

Dell also kicked MSFT ads off their desktop and in their setup of Vista much
to MSFTies chagrin who is still playing catchup ball in advertising despite
billions of dollars to play with-- see

New Tricks: How Microsoft Is Learning to Love Online Advertising
By Robert A. Guth (Or How a Woman whose MSFT Boss Called Her Stupid All the
Time is making Billions for Softie Soft and got ole Yusuf Mehdi a brand new
VP title)

The Wall Street JournalNovember 16, 2006

http://www.mediainfocenter.org/story...y_id=100335522

Jim Allchin has blogged this week about partitions from that would have Win
RE's startup repair on it but offers no details and I don't believe Jim can
offer any substantive details on this. It's very common for MSFT personnel
to allude to alternatives for getting access to Win RE--and no doubt
enterprises have them. But I'm not worried about "Joe Blow Hummer 3" or
"Suzy Manolo Bahnik Shopping is the Way to Fight the War while making Sure
my family goes no where near the armed services--cause Gee all those coffins
coming in to Dover with no end in sight".

My concern is the Home and Small Business user being able to fix Vista No
Boots.

CH


"half alive authorized" <half alive >
wrote in message news:4BAB76EE-D61A-44E6-A6CB-...
>
>
> "Chad Harris" wrote:
>
>> Correction:
>>
>> Spelling:
>>
>>
>> No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficient
>> comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to me ake it clear. If it's
>> not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> you
>> don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get it
>> translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> condescending,
>> dismissive tone of your question and glad to help. I also eagerly look
>> forward to the large volume of help you plan to post here--someday.
>>
>> My premise has been this:
>>
>>
>> MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to mention
>> they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager since
>> 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> health
>> and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>>
>> My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or suscinct:
>>
>> 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> customer
>> feedback from the public. However they **** on that by not allowing
>> Connect
>> access to bugs. They make
>> the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaigns by Wagner Edstrom
>> and
>> McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want to promote
>> sales
>> of a product that is going to ship broken that they didn't fix.
>>
>> 2) 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> place
>> on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build fixes
>> available in KBs you haven't seen.
>>
>> 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> on
>> their site.
>>
>> The reason I want these showcased and available is that they provide a
>> lot
>> of detail that answers questions people continue to ask.
>>
>> 4) This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education in
>> the same way that MSFT's pilot high school that purports to use only
>> laptops
>> and no books in Pennsylvanania that is in the news this week does.
>>
>> 5) want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> clearer understanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> product
>> keys which seems the subject of endless obsession. I have seen people
>> told
>> repeatedly how to get RC1 and have done it myself and noticed that they
>> post
>> questions without doing a search on the group--they probably don't know
>> it
>> exists and are using the crappy web interface made by the MSFT communnity
>> instead of OE or Win Mail. Many of the questions here are asked hundreds
>> of
>> times because people are to lazy to search the answers that most of us
>> have
>> answered hundreds of times who do the answering.
>>
>> I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> too
>> lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
>> more
>> imperative to up the level of education.
>>
>> I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> their
>> products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on MSFT's
>> site
>> on most of the major system features of Vista the way it was for XP at
>> the
>> stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2001 before the
>> Windows
>> XP Launch on October 25, 2001.
>> I also understand a very small percent of XP users on the planet used
>> Help
>> and Support in XP, and I hope they will take advantage of the new Help
>> server for Vista as well as Guided Support's work in progress in Vista
>> should they need it.
>>
>> If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was born
>> in
>> California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the usual
>> sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>>
>> I want to make it very clear.
>>
>> I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue streasms
>> to
>> customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The major
>> repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> is
>> Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> "Recovery."
>>
>> The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to a nasty policy
>> conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners" big guys like
>> Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. . They will have
>> recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that *WILL NOT* reach
>> Win
>> RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP where the
>> recovery
>> discs and partitions would not do a repair install which is the chief
>> modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows Advanced options fail.
>>
>> I have an additional challenge tailored just for Sam-R:
>>
>> You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> girls
>> you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
>> DVDs.
>> We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to recovery with
>> what we each have to use.
>>
>> You game? Bring it.
>>
>> [Please let me know if you can't comprehend the *points* that have been
>> made
>> here Sam-R. I aim to please you and will be glad to refine the
>> clarification until you can comprehend it.]
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> CH
>>
>>
>>
>> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>> > No Sam--you can't read something clearly written with sufficeint
>> > comprehension. Try this. I'll do my best to m ake it clear. If it's
>> > not--don't be shy and sing out. I'll parse it more clearly in the area
>> > you don't understand. If English is not your first language, I'll get
>> > it
>> > translated. I aim to please you. I'm terribly honored by the
>> > condescending tone of your question and glad to help.
>> >
>> > My premise has been this:
>> >
>> >
>> > MSFT is doing poorly at educating the public as to Vista, not to
>> > mention
>> > they haven't been able to fix major components like Device Manager
>> > since
>> > 1995. One of the major features of devmgmt.msc is to validate driver
>> > health and it doesn't. Google for the Beta driver chats.
>> >
>> > My points--and let me know if you need this made more clear or
>> > suscinct:
>> >
>> > 1) MSFT makes a disingenuous pomp and circumstance of encouraging
>> > customer
>> > feedback from the public.
>> > However they **** on that by not allowing Connect access to bugs. They
>> > make the Beta available as a sales adjunct to the campaings by Wagner
>> > Edstrom and McCann Ericson Worldwide. They hide bugs because they want
>> > to
>> > promote sales of a product that is going to ship broken that they
>> > didn't
>> > fix.
>> >
>> >
>> > 2) To maximize education they need to make Beta Chats available in one
>> > place on ther sites and in an MSKB the way they make milestone build
>> > fixes
>> > available in KBs you haven't seen.
>> >
>> > 3) To maximize education they need to make Beta Live Meetings available
>> > on
>> > their site.
>> >
>> > This gives up nothing propiritiary and doesn't impact any vague lol
>> > "security for their beta" whatsoever that Tom Ziegler very nebulously
>> > alluded to saying MSFT had "their own reasons." It promotes education
>> > in
>> > the same way that MSFT's pilot school in Pennsylvanania that is in the
>> > news this week does.
>> >
>> > I want the public to be much better users. I want them to have a much
>> > clearer u nderstanding than they have of how to download RC1 and get
>> > product keys which seems the subject of endless obsession.
>> >
>> > I realize that many of the people who ask these questions are a little
>> > too
>> > lazy to navigate to the MSFT sites and read them, so it becomes all the
>> > more imperative to up the level of education.
>> >
>> > I also think that those of us who work on newsgroups to help explain
>> > features and fix Windows for MSFT's customers and sometimes evangelize
>> > their products are entitled to high qaulity Vista info. It isn't on
>> > MSFT's site on most of the major system features of Vista the way it
>> > was
>> > for XP at the stage between RC1 and RC2 during the late summer of 2005.
>> >
>> > If this is not clear to you, by all means ask me to parse it. I was
>> > born
>> > in California, so I don't know if my command of English is up to the
>> > usual
>> > sophisticated level you're accustomed to.
>> >
>> > I want to make it very clear.
>> >
>> > I also alluded to the fact that one of the major sales revenue
>> > streasms
>> > to customers of MSFT for Vista will be on pre-installed boxes. The
>> > major
>> > repair modality for a no boot Vista is Win RE--and it's cheif component
>> > is
>> > Startup Repair located on the setup screen at the lower left as
>> > "Recovery." The OEM purchasers will not have a Vista retail DVD due to
>> > a
>> > nasty policy conjointly promoted by MSFT and its 30OEM "name partners"
>> > big guys like Dell, HP, Sony who make among other things computers. .
>> > They will have recovery CDs and hidden and non-hidden partitions that
>> > WILL
>> > NOT reach Win RE. This is analagous to the same arrangement in Win XP
>> > where the recovery discs and partitions would not do a repair install
>> > which is the chief modality to fix a no boot XP after F8 Windows
>> > Advanced
>> > options fail.
>> >
>> > I have an additional challenge for you:
>> >
>> > You take what OEM sends you and choose any of your ten home boys and
>> > girls
>> > you think are superior Windows users. I'll take the retail XP CDs and
>> > DVDs. We''ll put up some substantial money and see who wins as to
>> > recovery
>> > with what we each have to use.
>> >
>> > You game? Bring it.
>> >
>> > CH
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "SAM-R" <SAM-> wrote in message
>> > news:...
>> >> Do you have a point to make? Because if you do, you have not made it.
>> >> "Chad Harris" <> wrote in message
>> >> news:...
>> >>> "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06
>> >>>
>> >>> All of these cheerleaders for MSFT who say they care what the public
>> >>> files as to bugs should know they totally reject the idea of giving
>> >>> you
>> >>> any meaningful access to the bugs filed on Connect.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 6/5/06, I used Connect's feedback program (which I suppose is
>> >>> available to anyone) to suggest that they open bugs to the public as
>> >>> well as their Beta Chats and their Live Meetings that approximately
>> >>> 110
>> >>> people max attend on the average out of 27,000 TBTs.
>> >>>
>> >>> The resolution was "CLOSED WON'T FIX" 9/16/06 and even though I
>> >>> designated it public, they took it private to hide it in keeping with
>> >>> the devious MSFT no-transparency culture now fostered by the new
>> >>> Sinofsky regime. It's the same culture that has MSFT turning over all
>> >>> your MSN searches to the government and their security bloggers lying
>> >>> to
>> >>> you about doing it as of their meeting June 1 and 2 in Washington,
>> >>> D.C.
>> >>>
>> >>> The suggestion complaint read:
>> >>>
>> >>> "MSFT has deployed an attitude of utmost contempt for the public and
>> >>> the
>> >>> CPP by restricting information from them and defeating any semblance
>> >>> of
>> >>> a learning curve. Connect blocks access to bug reports by the
>> >>> public.
>> >>>
>> >>> This is done with the intention of preventing their customsers from
>> >>> contexting bugs, seeing bugs, realizing what won't be fixed or what
>> >>> is
>> >>> deffered to "fix" and never will be by Blackcomb Vienna.
>> >>>
>> >>> MSFT further in the most quintissential anti-education posture
>> >>> possible
>> >>> in contrast to the Gates Foundation stomps all over the learning
>> >>> curves
>> >>> of their customers with respect to Vista by
>> >>>
>> >>> 1) denying them access to Beta chats where some real info is
>> >>> exchanged
>> >>> that only approximately 100-200 people out of 27000 Beta testors in
>> >>> different groups including but not restricted to TBT and TAP and
>> >>> those
>> >>> added in the last few months. Instead of sensibly providing a central
>> >>> link for all the chats on the MSFT web site, say
>> >>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista and the Technet site and MSDN
>> >>> they
>> >>> hide the chats. Selected MSDN bloggers put selected chats on line,
>> >>> and
>> >>> afik the chats aren't under any NDA. How inconsiderate to hide them
>> >>> from
>> >>> the public.
>> >>>
>> >>> How anti learning for a company who considers its employees elete
>> >>> applicants with creme de la crem academic pedigress although this is
>> >>> hardly the case.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2) MSFT also denies their public customer base who put food on their
>> >>> tables and toys in their homes access to multiple *Beta Live Meetings
>> >>> on
>> >>> Vista (I'm not talking about the infrequent and question limited
>> >>> Technet
>> >>> LMs) during the week and refuses to archive them. They have no more
>> >>> than
>> >>> 200 and often less attendies. There are 27000 plus TBTs.
>> >>>
>> >>> 3) MSFT also restricts their Beta newsgroups from the public and
>> >>> there
>> >>> is no reason to do so. The public Vista grousp are considerably less
>> >>> in
>> >>> number, and the information is considerably less in quality with even
>> >>> more newbie questions than on the TBT groups.
>> >>>
>> >>> MSFT's only regard for the public is in the context of a file and
>> >>> settings transfer manger--to transfer as much bandwidth of cash into
>> >>> the
>> >>> MSFT pockets from the public as possible.
>> >>>
>> >>> MSFT has Community Liasons assigned to key Vista teams who have not
>> >>> lifted a finger to publish comprehensive information on the MSFT
>> >>> public
>> >>> websites. Excellent information is available on MSDN and Technet
>> >>> blogs,
>> >>> but they are known and used by a limited number and subset of people.
>> >>>
>> >>> No comprehensive and decent level information is available on SFC and
>> >>> Win RE in Vista on any MSFT site. What is there is insulting to
>> >>> anyone
>> >>> with an interest in Windows who is provides consistent considerable
>> >>> help
>> >>> for your customers on your newsgroups.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Suggestion Category
>> >>>
>> >>> Feedback (Bugs and Suggestions)
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Recommendation
>> >>>
>> >>> Correct this eggregious lack of information immediately.
>> >>> 1) Make the Beta chats public and archive them in a central place
>> >>> and
>> >>> showcase this on your community websites and Vista sites.
>> >>> 2) Make the Beta Live Meetings all public and archive them in a
>> >>> central place and showcase this on your community websites and Vista
>> >>> sites.
>> >>> 3) Stop hiding bug access for Beta testers. TBTs have offered to
>> >>> check them for adults who are interested on your public newsgroups.
>> >>> That
>> >>> arms length approach would be pathetic.
>> >>> 4) The public doesn't have any feedback as to efforts they expend
>> >>> to
>> >>> give you bug information. MSFT doesn't give a damn what the unwashed
>> >>> public thinks. Your arrogance that cost you nearly 250 million and