Why Vista is Unlikable and Win7 is already irrelevant

Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of trying
to connect to another Vista computer.
Although all sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last
time it will not work when needed again without rebooting one or more
computers.
This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of the Earth has not
adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission critical networks of any
size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders of magnitude more stable for
networking.
Vista SP3 or whatever name Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same schlock
under is a deader than dead issue already because it is nothing but Vista
with a marginally different GUI and with the economy the way it is who gives
a rat's behind about it anyway?

The name "pupick" already sounds funny:

"pupick" <> wrote in message
news:3ECE4BE5-FD8D-4C75-963D-...
> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
> trying to connect to another Vista computer.
> Although all sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last
> time it will not work when needed again without rebooting one or more
> computers.
> This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of the Earth has
> not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission critical networks
> of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders of magnitude more
> stable for networking.
> Vista SP3 or whatever name Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same
> schlock under is a deader than dead issue already because it is nothing
> but Vista with a marginally different GUI and with the economy the way it
> is who gives a rat's behind about it anyway?

So, what is the competitive product in which you have a financial stake?

--
Daniel Jameson
·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·
If the man asks you to hate another,
It is not so you can benefit at the expense of the other,
It is so he can benefit at the expense of you.


"pupick" <> wrote in message
news:3ECE4BE5-FD8D-4C75-963D-...
> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
> trying to connect to another Vista computer.
> Although all sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last
> time it will not work when needed again without rebooting one or more
> computers.
> This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of the Earth has
> not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission critical networks
> of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders of magnitude more
> stable for networking.
> Vista SP3 or whatever name Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same
> schlock under is a deader than dead issue already because it is nothing
> but Vista with a marginally different GUI and with the economy the way it
> is who gives a rat's behind about it anyway?

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:38:40 -0700, pupick wrote:

> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
> trying to connect to another Vista computer. Although all
> sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last time it will
> not work when needed again without rebooting one or more computers.
> This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of the Earth has
> not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission critical
> networks of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders of
> magnitude more stable for networking.
> Vista SP3 or whatever name Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same
> schlock under is a deader than dead issue already because it is nothing
> but Vista with a marginally different GUI and with the economy the way
> it is who gives a rat's behind about it anyway?

My advise has always been to go with what works for you and what you
like. Life's too short for the hassle.

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:47:08 -0400, webster72n wrote:

> The name "pupick" already sounds funny:

It's Yiddish for "navel" - or "bellybutton", your choice :-)

In the other main dialect of Yiddish, it's "pippick". FWIW.

> "pupick" <> wrote in message
> news:3ECE4BE5-FD8D-4C75-963D-...

<SNIP>
--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom

"ray" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:38:40 -0700, pupick wrote:
>
>> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
>> trying to connect to another Vista computer. Although all
>> sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last time it will
>> not work when needed again without rebooting one or more computers.
>> This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of the Earth has
>> not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission critical
>> networks of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders of
>> magnitude more stable for networking.
>> Vista SP3 or whatever name Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same
>> schlock under is a deader than dead issue already because it is nothing
>> but Vista with a marginally different GUI and with the economy the way
>> it is who gives a rat's behind about it anyway?
>
> My advise has always been to go with what works for you and what you
> like. Life's too short for the hassle.

Friends don't let friends use Ubuntu.

On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:01:25 -0700, measekite's psychiatrist wrote:

> "ray" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:38:40 -0700, pupick wrote:
>>
>>> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
>>> trying to connect to another Vista computer. Although all
>>> sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last time it
>>> will not work when needed again without rebooting one or more
>>> computers. This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of
>>> the Earth has not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission
>>> critical networks of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders
>>> of magnitude more stable for networking. Vista SP3 or whatever name
>>> Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same schlock under is a deader
>>> than dead issue already because it is nothing but Vista with a
>>> marginally different GUI and with the economy the way it is who gives
>>> a rat's behind about it anyway?
>>
>> My advise has always been to go with what works for you and what you
>> like. Life's too short for the hassle.
>
> Friends don't let friends use Ubuntu.

Interesting. Why would you be bringing up Ubuntu in a vista ng?

"ray" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:01:25 -0700, measekite's psychiatrist wrote:
>
>> "ray" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:38:40 -0700, pupick wrote:
>>>
>>>> Every time I start thinking Vista is not so bad I make the mistake of
>>>> trying to connect to another Vista computer. Although all
>>>> sharing/permissions are properly set and it worked the last time it
>>>> will not work when needed again without rebooting one or more
>>>> computers. This is why mine and nearly every business on the face of
>>>> the Earth has not adapted Vista: it is totally unsuitable for mission
>>>> critical networks of any size. XP is far from perfect but it is orders
>>>> of magnitude more stable for networking. Vista SP3 or whatever name
>>>> Microsoft thinks they can peddle the same schlock under is a deader
>>>> than dead issue already because it is nothing but Vista with a
>>>> marginally different GUI and with the economy the way it is who gives
>>>> a rat's behind about it anyway?
>>>
>>> My advise has always been to go with what works for you and what you
>>> like. Life's too short for the hassle.
>>
>> Friends don't let friends use Ubuntu.
>
> Interesting. Why would you be bringing up Ubuntu in a vista ng?

Because you always push Open Source. Why would you do that in a vista
forum?

(I sent this 13.5 hours ago and I still can't find it on the Microsoft
site, so here's another try.)

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:47:08 -0400, webster72n wrote:

> The name "pupick" already sounds funny:

It's Yiddish for "navel" - or "bellybutton", your choice :-)

In the other main dialect of Yiddish, it's "pippick". FWIW.

> "pupick" <> wrote in message
> news:3ECE4BE5-FD8D-4C75-963D-...

<SNIP>

--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom