I hate Windows Vista file associations dialog ***MOD LOCK THREAD***

[Fullmetal Chocobo]

Yay operator error.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: bsobel

The Advance edit dialog that existed in Windows XP has been removed: http://pixma.damnmachine.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/advanced_tn.jpg

Ok, I honestly didn't know that dialog was there in XP. But I just brought it up in both XP and the Vista associations dialog. Looks like you can't easily edit the icon for an application or add additional verbs.

Where you really using the functionality, and if so, for what. It does seem the default behaviour of browsing for and selecting an application covers the needs of 99.9% of the user base.

Bill

It's used a lot for repairing systems that have had their associations screwed up either from crashes or viruses. For instance when the .exe, .bat, etc where improperly associated with Media Center instead of 'application', you could not launch anything. Under XP this could be fixed easily.

I would say it's used 1000 times per year to fix a system that's been screwed up.

 

[juktar]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: bsobel

The Advance edit dialog that existed in Windows XP has been removed: http://pixma.damnmachine.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/advanced_tn.jpg

Ok, I honestly didn't know that dialog was there in XP. But I just brought it up in both XP and the Vista associations dialog. Looks like you can't easily edit the icon for an application or add additional verbs.

Where you really using the functionality, and if so, for what. It does seem the default behaviour of browsing for and selecting an application covers the needs of 99.9% of the user base.

Bill

It's used a lot for repairing systems that have had their associations screwed up either from crashes or viruses. For instance when the .exe, .bat, etc where improperly associated with Media Center instead of 'application', you could not launch anything. Under XP this could be fixed easily.

I would say it's used 1000 times per year to fix a system that's been screwed up.

I guess I still don't get it. To associate a file, you do not need to go into the advanced tab. The advanced tab has more information. Such as what to do with it like open. That is not even a pull down, you need to know the actions to take and type it in. To fix associations, just browse to the application and select it.

For instance. When I go into advanced button:

I can change the icon or edit/add an action. When an action is added, you choose the program to open it with and wether to use DDE or not.

Now, above the advanced button is a change button, if you click that you can select a program or browse for a program. It does almost the same thing. The action should almost always be open, so why would you change that?

 

[bsobel]

It's used a lot for repairing systems that have had their associations screwed up either from crashes or viruses. For instance when the .exe, .bat, etc where improperly associated with Media Center instead of 'application', you could not launch anything. Under XP this could be fixed easily.

You do that manually? Sheesh. It's called a registry merge file 🙂

 

[Smilin]

Wow, ok. I've been working on computers for decades and I've never once seen associations alone get screwed up by crashes. If a nasty crash clobbers a registry there is no way that damage is going to be confined soley to file associations and no where else. I've fixed more registry's than I can count and this just doesn't happen. If I found a goofed up file association due to some crash I would view it as merely the tip of the iceberg and start looking for a replacement hive.

Any deliberate malicious alterations to say the CMD association are also fixed by hand and not through an advanced file associations dialog. In many cases an AV vendor simply provides a cleanup tool. If it's something more involved like say root kit removal you flatten the system.

This is your latest argument regarding the file associations dialog? Keep it around for that reason? "Used 1000 times per year" is an utter crock. Back that fact up. This whole argument regarding the file associations has gotten ludicrous. Logical rational thinking and *facts* brought us around to the point where "user error" was the culprit and now this nuttiness has appeared out of nowhere to provide some escape route.

You've yet to even admit that Firefox associations can be altered. How far are you willing to take this just to avoid admiting that you were wrong?

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Wow, ok. I've been working on computers for decades and I've never once seen associations alone get screwed up by crashes. If a nasty crash clobbers a registry there is no way that damage is going to be confined soley to file associations and no where else. I've fixed more registry's than I can count and this just doesn't happen. If I found a goofed up file association due to some crash I would view it as merely the tip of the iceberg and start looking for a replacement hive.

Any deliberate malicious alterations to say the CMD association are also fixed by hand and not through an advanced file associations dialog. In many cases an AV vendor simply provides a cleanup tool. If it's something more involved like say root kit removal you flatten the system.

This is your latest argument regarding the file associations dialog? Keep it around for that reason? "Used 1000 times per year" is an utter crock. Back that fact up. This whole argument regarding the file associations has gotten ludicrous. Logical rational thinking and *facts* brought us around to the point where "user error" was the culprit and now this nuttiness has appeared out of nowhere to provide some escape route.

You've yet to even admit that Firefox associations can be altered. How far are you willing to take this just to avoid admiting that you were wrong?

Under Windows XP it's used 1000 times a year and I'm sticking by that. You may not tweak your system as much but others do. Sometimes to fix problems and sometimes to add and edit things.

Agian Firefox associations COULD NOT BE FIXED using any of the Windows Vista dialog boxes that are provided. It didn't work, I'll repeat that agian, IT DID NOT WORK. I used a third party app to resolve the BUG. I suppose you will tell me that Vista is perfect and has no bugs?


---

From Microsoft:

Thanks for the feedback everyone. There are a lot of good points here.

The decision to remove the advanced file associations tab was a difficult one. There were a number of problems facing it that made it a candidate for removal.

1. It had a number a cross hive issues that worked over HKCU and HKLM which caused a lot of problems with the new UAC framework.

2. It is very low traffic UI

3. Most of the functionality is available other places

4. There were many instances of users getting themselves into trouble using the advanced UI because it was just a glorified registry editor. In most cases if you mess something up in the advanced UI there is no recovery path.

The most common usage we found for this UI was IT admins trying to go in and fix file associations from some piece of malware. In vista, both UAC and Windows defender help solve this problem. <--- LOL :roll:

[

In addition the UI is not well suited for that task. Ultimately we want to ship something that provides a better experience for tweaking the underlying pieces of file associations while helping the user not hose the registry.

We are still working on what the best release mechanism will be for this functionality.

I absolutely understand the problem with unistalling Firefox, but this has also been a long standing problem that has existed in previous versions of the OS. This issue is fixed if you run IE or another browser. The other browser should detect some of the keys it cares about aren't there give you the option to set it as the default. This will fix the problems of FF removing keys.

Ultimately, we want a framework where there is a easy way to delegate file\protocol assocaitons at unistall so there is a gracefull hand off. The new default programs hand off is a part of that foundation but we still have a ways to go.

cheers,

Ed

Source: Shell Revealed

 

[bsobel]

The most common usage we found for this UI was IT admins trying to go in and fix file associations from some piece of malware. In vista, both UAC and Windows defender help solve this problem. <--- LOL :roll:

Have you offered any evidence to the contrary?

In addition the UI is not well suited for that task. Ultimately we want to ship something that provides a better experience for tweaking the underlying pieces of file associations while helping the user not hose the registry.

That just reiterates what we've been saying and refutes what you posted.

Bill

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
Under Windows XP it's used 1000 times a year and I'm sticking by that. You may not tweak your system as much but others do. Sometimes to fix problems and sometimes to add and edit things.
Agian Firefox associations COULD NOT BE FIXED using any of the Windows Vista dialog boxes that are provided. It didn't work, I'll repeat that agian, IT DID NOT WORK. I used a third party app to resolve the BUG. I suppose you will tell me that Vista is perfect and has no bugs?

mebe since you keep using caps, repeated characters, underlines, boldface and all that it's what it takes to get through to you. I'll give it a shot.. :disgust:

IT CAN BE FIXED using the Windows Vista dialog boxes. HERE IS HOW YOU DO IT:

Originally posted by: loup garou
Looks fine to me.

Reinstall Firefox, something is obviously fvcked up.

Why do you still think that this is a Vista bug?

Your Firefox was not installed right. You've already been shown in this thread with screenshots that it works perfectly fine. Your Firefox install was broken. Reinstall. If still no worky, get Firefox support. The Vista dialog boxes are capable of doing exactly what you are trying to do. Ooops, sorry... The Vista dialog boxes are capable of doing exactly what you are trying to do. ..there.

From Microsoft:

2. It is very low traffic UI

I'll translate for you: Nobody used it. That's what juktar, bsobel, and I have pretty much been saying.

3. Most of the functionality is available other places

...again as everyone has said.. This includes the functionality you say you are after.

4. There were many instances of users getting themselves into trouble using the advanced UI because it was just a glorified registry editor. In most cases if you mess something up in the advanced UI there is no recovery path.

...As I told you earlier. Wanna be power users like that "advanced" title on the dialog they are working in. Real power users would use regedit. Just because you know where the dipstick is once you raise the hood doesn't mean you belong there. Typical users? See #3

The most common usage we found for this UI was IT admins trying to go in and fix file associations from some piece of malware. In vista, both UAC and Windows defender help solve this problem. In addition the UI is not well suited for that task. Ultimately we want to ship something that provides a better experience for tweaking the underlying pieces of file associations while helping the user not hose the registry.

Note he said "trying to go in and fix", "the UI is not well suited for that task" etc. Follow earlier advice given to you instead:
"Any deliberate malicious alterations to say the CMD association are also fixed by hand and not through an advanced file associations dialog. In many cases an AV vendor simply provides a cleanup tool. If it's something more involved like say root kit removal you flatten the system. "

I think he's basically saying that folks like you keep trying to be Uber and fix this with an "Advanced" dialog then end up jacking your system up.

If you bust something in that dialog do you even know how to restore your registry? You're not even sure what keys it's changing so how could you? These aren't in control sets so lastknowngood won't save you. Know how to restore the whole thing?

We are still working on what the best release mechanism will be for this functionality.

I absolutely understand the problem with unistalling Firefox, but this has also been a long standing problem that has existed in previous versions of the OS. This issue is fixed if you run IE or another browser. The other browser should detect some of the keys it cares about aren't there give you the option to set it as the default. This will fix the problems of FF removing keys.

Ultimately, we want a framework where there is a easy way to delegate file\protocol assocaitons at unistall so there is a gracefull hand off. The new default programs hand off is a part of that foundation but we still have a ways to go.

What? What did he say? "This will fix the problems of FF removing keys?" You mean FireFox's uninstaller jacks things up and doesn't put them back the way they were? The problem "existed in previous versions of the OS?" Nice. Clearly a Vista bug :roll:

How many times have you been told in this thread alone that Windows Vista allows you to do the things you are trying to do? It allows you to make the changes with Firefox that you desire. You've been shown actual screenshots of it working!

It just so happens that Firefox's installer screwed up and didn't make the proper changes. Reinstall Firefox or contact their tech support. The fact that you used your 3rd party app to fix things is not an indication of a problem with Vista. Know what else would have fixed it? Reinstalling Firefox or calling their tech support. Know what would not have fixed it? Calling MS tech support. They would have told you to (wait for it..) Reinstall Firefox or call their tech support.

Everyone else is able to get this to work on Vista. Apparently it works on Vista.

You're just mad because, for all the world to see, you blogged about how Vista is broken when it turns out you just didn't know what you were doing.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: bsobel

The most common usage we found for this UI was IT admins trying to go in and fix file associations from some piece of malware. In vista, both UAC and Windows defender help solve this problem. <--- LOL :roll:

Have you offered any evidence to the contrary?

A lot of users will just turn off UAC because they will find it annoying and it's only effective in some cases when it's on anyways. Windows Defender well it seems to have a rather poor detection rate: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,128660/article.html

In addition the UI is not well suited for that task. Ultimately we want to ship something that provides a better experience for tweaking the underlying pieces of file associations while helping the user not hose the registry.

That just reiterates what we've been saying and refutes what you posted.

No it doesn't, it just means that admin's that know what there doing can use the dialog box and won't make a mistake while average joe's could screw it up. It's also an excuse for why Vista didn't ship with a replacement dialog.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
Under Windows XP it's used 1000 times a year and I'm sticking by that. You may not tweak your system as much but others do. Sometimes to fix problems and sometimes to add and edit things.
Agian Firefox associations COULD NOT BE FIXED using any of the Windows Vista dialog boxes that are provided. It didn't work, I'll repeat that agian, IT DID NOT WORK. I used a third party app to resolve the BUG. I suppose you will tell me that Vista is perfect and has no bugs?

mebe since you keep using caps, repeated characters, underlines, boldface and all that it's what it takes to get through to you. I'll give it a shot.. :disgust:

IT CAN BE FIXED using the Windows Vista dialog boxes. HERE IS HOW YOU DO IT:

Originally posted by: loup garou
Looks fine to me.

Reinstall Firefox, something is obviously fvcked up.

Why do you still think that this is a Vista bug?

Your Firefox was not installed right. You've already been shown in this thread with screenshots that it works perfectly fine. Your Firefox install was broken. Reinstall. If still no worky, get Firefox support. The Vista dialog boxes are capable of doing exactly what you are trying to do. Ooops, sorry... The Vista dialog boxes are capable of doing exactly what you are trying to do. ..there.

From Microsoft:

2. It is very low traffic UI

I'll translate for you: Nobody used it. That's what juktar, bsobel, and I have pretty much been saying. That's his opinion and yours.

3. Most of the functionality is available other places

...again as everyone has said.. This includes the functionality you say you are after.

4. There were many instances of users getting themselves into trouble using the advanced UI because it was just a glorified registry editor. In most cases if you mess something up in the advanced UI there is no recovery path.

...As I told you earlier. Wanna be power users like that "advanced" title on the dialog they are working in. Real power users would use regedit. Just because you know where the dipstick is once you raise the hood doesn't mean you belong there. Typical users? See #3

The most common usage we found for this UI was IT admins trying to go in and fix file associations from some piece of malware. In vista, both UAC and Windows defender help solve this problem. In addition the UI is not well suited for that task. Ultimately we want to ship something that provides a better experience for tweaking the underlying pieces of file associations while helping the user not hose the registry.

Note he said "trying to go in and fix", "the UI is not well suited for that task" etc. Follow earlier advice given to you instead:
"Any deliberate malicious alterations to say the CMD association are also fixed by hand and not through an advanced file associations dialog. In many cases an AV vendor simply provides a cleanup tool. If it's something more involved like say root kit removal you flatten the system. "

I think he's basically saying that folks like you keep trying to be Uber and fix this with an "Advanced" dialog then end up jacking your system up.

If you bust something in that dialog do you even know how to restore your registry? You're not even sure what keys it's changing so how could you? These aren't in control sets so lastknowngood won't save you. Know how to restore the whole thing?

We are still working on what the best release mechanism will be for this functionality.

I absolutely understand the problem with unistalling Firefox, but this has also been a long standing problem that has existed in previous versions of the OS. This issue is fixed if you run IE or another browser. The other browser should detect some of the keys it cares about aren't there give you the option to set it as the default. This will fix the problems of FF removing keys.

Ultimately, we want a framework where there is a easy way to delegate file\protocol assocaitons at unistall so there is a gracefull hand off. The new default programs hand off is a part of that foundation but we still have a ways to go.

What? What did he say? "This will fix the problems of FF removing keys?" You mean FireFox's uninstaller jacks things up and doesn't put them back the way they were? The problem "existed in previous versions of the OS?" Nice. Clearly a Vista bug :roll:

How many times have you been told in this thread alone that Windows Vista allows you to do the things you are trying to do? It allows you to make the changes with Firefox that you desire. You've been shown actual screenshots of it working!

It just so happens that Firefox's installer screwed up and didn't make the proper changes. Reinstall Firefox or contact their tech support. The fact that you used your 3rd party app to fix things is not an indication of a problem with Vista. Know what else would have fixed it? Reinstalling Firefox or calling their tech support. Know what would not have fixed it? Calling MS tech support. They would have told you to (wait for it..) Reinstall Firefox or call their tech support.

Everyone else is able to get this to work on Vista. Apparently it works on Vista.

You're just mad because, for all the world to see, you blogged about how Vista is broken when it turns out you just didn't know what you were doing.

I'll give it to you in steps since you STILL are missing the point:

1. Firefox not acting as default browser even though it should be.

2. Re-installing Firefox several times does NOT fix the problem and it does NOT appear like this: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/werk/defaults.JPG ....cannot manually force it to appear.

3. Vista dialog boxes are unable to set Firefox as default, protocols http, https and ftp are listed but cannot be changed.

4. Notice advance edit dialog is MISSING.

5. Install third party app and quickly fix the problem.

The point still remains that the advance edit dialog box was very useful for some of us. Sometimes you don't want to crawl through the registry and that little dialog was a easy and quick way to add, edit and fix things. It always worked in Windows XP and the third party app works great in Vista.

I also think Vista can be improve in dozens of ways, like why in details mode full row select cannot be disabled ?

Many here think vista is perfect and always works perfect and if it fails then it's simply a reflection on the user. I'm sorry but that just makes me laugh. 🙂

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
I'll give it to you in steps since you STILL are missing the point:
1. Firefox not acting as default browser even though it should be.

No Vista problem here.

2. Re-installing Firefox several times does NOT fix the problem and it does NOT appear like this: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/werk/defaults.JPG ....cannot manually force it to appear.

No Vista problem here.

3. Vista dialog boxes are unable to set Firefox as default, protocols http, https and ftp are listed but cannot be changed.

Sounding like a broken record but the proof is there...

Originally posted by: loup garou
Looks fine to me.

No Vista problem here.

4. Notice advance edit dialog is MISSING.

You can do everything you are trying to do...

Originally posted by: loup garou
Looks fine to me.

No Vista problem here.

5. Install third party app and quickly fix the problem. [/b]

Glad your 3rd party app fixed your Firefox problem.
No Vista problem here.

The point still remains that the advance edit dialog box was very useful for some of us. Sometimes you don't want to crawl through the registry and that little dialog was a easy and quick way to add, edit and fix things. It always worked in Windows XP and the third party app works great in Vista.

You mean "few if any" of you right? ...

From Microsoft:
2. It is very low traffic UI

You also mean it was something that does nothing beyond regedit but provides a way for wannabe power users to get themselves into trouble...

From Microsoft:
4. There were many instances of users getting themselves into trouble using the advanced UI because it was just a glorified registry editor.

...it also provides nothing that would have helped in this situation if your Firefox installer worked correctly.

I also think Vista can be improve in dozens of ways, like why in details mode full row select cannot be disabled ?

I am not the slightest bit interested in whatever you are babbling about now.

Many here think vista is perfect and always works perfect and if it fails then it's simply a reflection on the user. I'm sorry but that just makes me laugh. 🙂

Nobody here has said Vista is perfect. Please provide a quote on that. Vista is capable of doing what you asked (it has been proven to you). You just seem hell bent on blaming Vista for what is obviously a Firefox installer issue. Your inability to admit your mistake seems to indicate that you think of yourself as perfect. So sad 🙁

Besides aren't you tired of being clowned yet? Nobody in this thread is living in that little alternate bubble of reality that you seem to be. I mean if this whole thing wasn't proven to you back on April 25th it would be different. As it stands now every response you make is just embarassing proof that you are someone who is to arrogant to admit when they are wrong. I would suggest letting the thread die so you can save face but it became too late for that nearly a week ago.

 

[juktar]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

I'll give it to you in steps since you STILL are missing the point:

1. Firefox not acting as default browser even though it should be.

2. Re-installing Firefox several times does NOT fix the problem and it does NOT appear like this: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/werk/defaults.JPG ....cannot manually force it to appear.

3. Vista dialog boxes are unable to set Firefox as default, protocols http, https and ftp are listed but cannot be changed.

4. Notice advance edit dialog is MISSING.

5. Install third party app and quickly fix the problem.

The point still remains that the advance edit dialog box was very useful for some of us. Sometimes you don't want to crawl through the registry and that little dialog was a easy and quick way to add, edit and fix things. It always worked in Windows XP and the third party app works great in Vista.

I also think Vista can be improve in dozens of ways, like why in details mode full row select cannot be disabled ?

Many here think vista is perfect and always works perfect and if it fails then it's simply a reflection on the user. I'm sorry but that just makes me laugh. 🙂

So what you are really trying to say is that YOU cannot use a tool that you used in XP in Vista to fix 3rd party install problems?

This is the core of the problem. FIREFOX INSTALL SCREWED UP ON YOUR MACHINE.

Deal with it an move on.

Isn't there a setting in Firefox (I don't know as I don't use it) that says make Firefox my default browser? (Like every other application in the world). If not, can't you just make IE you default browser, start up Firefox and it (should) say it is not the default browser, would you like me to make it the default browser?

I agree that the advanced edit made people feel like they really knew what they were doing. You could occomplish the same thing inthe button above that called CHANGE....

 

[bsobel]

Smilin, I think this thread is done and ready to be locked. He simply wants to argue and I dont think any amount of rational (or irrational 🙂) discussion is going to change that.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Smilin, I think this thread is done and ready to be locked. He simply wants to argue and I dont think any amount of rational (or irrational 🙂) discussion is going to change that.

:thumbsup:

 

[Tegeril]

I like the jab at Defender detection rates, which has absolutely nothing to do with its ability to repair file associations.

 

[13Gigatons]

I received a email saying Smilin works for MICROSOFT so I'm not going to argue with him anymore since he's being paid to troll for his company.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
I received a email saying Smilin works for MICROSOFT so I'm not going to argue with him anymore since he's being paid to troll for his company.

heh, who told you that?

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
I received a email saying Smilin works for MICROSOFT so I'm not going to argue with him anymore since he's being paid to troll for his company.

The only person trolling here is you. Your upset a feature was removed (and since you used it alot, thats a reasomable point for you to make). However, you claimed this feature was much more important that it realy was. You seem unwilling to admit 'gee, wow I used it alot but didnt' realize it wasnt commonly used'. Further you blamed a number of issues on Vista which clearly were not. It was proved to you that these where not Vista issue, yet you continue to blame it.

Not sure what resolution you're looking for here. I doubt anything short of an apology from Bill Gates and a vista patch with the dialog will make you happy, as such, is there any valid reason to not lock the thread at this point?

 

[Tegeril]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons
I received a email saying Smilin works for MICROSOFT so I'm not going to argue with him anymore since he's being paid to troll for his company.

Please vacate your own thread.

 

[13Gigatons]

I don't know guys I see nothing but Pro Microsoft opinions from Smilin:

Meh, don't overestimate my inside knowledge. I'm not on that team (nor is your TAM). Thinking there would be no service pack over the entire life of the product is pretty silly. I'm kinda surprised there's an argument about it. I've no idea what the plans or release dates are though. I can't give you Dave's number either so don't ask.

No, your poll still sucks.

It has no option for "running now just fine"

It also has no real option for "never" which if you knew crap about software and operating systems would be the real answer. Do you have any clue whatsoever how many bugs are sitting in Windows, Mac OS, OSX, Linux, Unix, OS/400 etc etc???

These have so many moving parts that there will always...repeat...always..be something wrong with them. There are bugs in Windows 3.1 that were never corrected. It would be utterly impractical to get a perfect OS **and** have innovation. If you can't wrap your head around this then you don't know a lot about computers.

You are a troll and a little speck of poop. Stop making these retarded threads so people with real discussion and troubleshooting questions can get some use out of the forums

*sigh*

Not a Vista bug.

If you try to run it with hardware and drivers that aren't fully supported on Vista then you'll have problems.

Same thing with XP MCE.

/shrug

You're taking your XP MCE hardware and loading Vista on it. Might work, might not. If it does, cool. Build a Vista box from the ground up and things are fine. Buy an OEM that's all preloaded with fully supported Vista hardware and things are fine. This is the same song and dance we had with XP, 2000 etc..

It's nice when the stuff you bought just before Vista released works but really it was still released before Vista with drivers that say XP so it's not guaranteed. With some luck your hardware vendors will provide some better drivers. They aren't oblidged to though.

I'm partially in the same boat too. I've got arguably the best non-DX10 card available right now. meh. I knew what I was getting into. I'll move to DX-10 at a later date.

Stop putting sugar in the gas tank and remember to change your oil.

I ran a single XP install for it's entire lifespan through several motherboards and other upgrades and never had the issues you're describing.

Note that sporadic failed boots are the sign of hardware problems, often power supply. Not the OS. The same set of instructions are running in the OS each time you boot. They do not simply behave one way one time and another some other time.

Yeah for it's time that was quite possibly one of the greatest OSs ever written. I hope history judges Vista the same.

Not understanding why DX10 doesn't run on XP shows a lack of knowledge. Ranting about it makes you look like a noob.


Me? Been running Vista RTM since November...getting close to 6 months now. No showstoppers here. Works great and makes XP feel really dated now that I'm used to it. It cracks me up when people tell me what my Vista experience is like.

This happens every update. People come out of the woodwork saying it caused their mom to get cancer. When people get down to root cause it always turns out to be something other than the update. You going to really tell me that mouse pointer code is causing utilities to vanish into thin air, USB problems??? Give me a break.

The #1 cause of this FUD: People apply MS or 3rd party updates then fail to reboot. A problem sits like a timebomb in the pendingfilerename regkey and then when they pull down an MS update that requires a reboot, BAM! The update gets blamed when really a reboot by itself would have cause the same problem. #2 cause: corruption on the filesystem sitting underneath files required for boot. Apply an update, BAM! The update gets blamed when really a reboot by itself would have caused the same problem.

How do I know this? I used to be on the team that took the failed update calls. We didn't guess (like the monkey's you are quoting), we found ROOT CAUSE. EVERY time. Simply telling a customer to remove a security update was NOT an option. Not fixing the case was NOT an option

Not single complaint or criticsim from Smilin...always the user or hardware is to blame. As someone who has used Microsoft software for many years, I can say with 100% confidence that it has bugs.

 

[bsobel]

Not single complaint or criticsim from Smilin...always the user or hardware is to blame. As someone who has used Microsoft software for many years, I can say with 100% confidence that it has bugs.

What an extremely slimey post. Did you read what you quoted?

"It also has no real option for "never" which if you knew crap about software and operating systems would be the real answer. Do you have any clue whatsoever how many bugs are sitting in Windows, Mac OS, OSX, Linux, Unix, OS/400 etc etc???
These have so many moving parts that there will always...repeat...always..be something wrong with them. There are bugs in Windows 3.1 that were never corrected. It would be utterly impractical to get a perfect OS **and** have innovation. "

This statement is in direct conflict to your statement of "always the user or hardware is to blame. As someone who has used Microsoft software for many years, I can say with 100% confidence that it has bugs"

I strongly suggest you let this thread just die, you are not (in any way) helping yourself by your above post.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Not single complaint or criticsim from Smilin...always the user or hardware is to blame. As someone who has used Microsoft software for many years, I can say with 100% confidence that it has bugs.

What an extremely slimey post. Did you read what you quoted?

"It also has no real option for "never" which if you knew crap about software and operating systems would be the real answer. Do you have any clue whatsoever how many bugs are sitting in Windows, Mac OS, OSX, Linux, Unix, OS/400 etc etc???
These have so many moving parts that there will always...repeat...always..be something wrong with them. There are bugs in Windows 3.1 that were never corrected. It would be utterly impractical to get a perfect OS **and** have innovation. "

This statement is in direct conflict to your statement of "always the user or hardware is to blame. As someone who has used Microsoft software for many years, I can say with 100% confidence that it has bugs"

I strongly suggest you let this thread just die, you are not (in any way) helping yourself by your above post.

It shows how hostile he is to anybody criticizing Microsoft Software. It's always "you suck" you "speck of poop".

 

[bsobel]

It shows how hostile he is to anybody criticizing Microsoft Software. It's always "you suck" you "speck of poop".

a) Changing the argument once again. You stated that he said it's never the OS's fault. However, in your quote (that I requoted) I even showed you were he said the OS DOES have bugs. Since your statement was factually incorrect, your now trying to claim a different reason for your quote.

b) You picked two threads out of thousands to make your point. Smilin is one of the best posters in this forum. All I've seen you do is change your story as your comments are proven false.

c) I ask you again what you hope to gain from prolonging this thread.

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: bsobel

It shows how hostile he is to anybody criticizing Microsoft Software. It's always "you suck" you "speck of poop".

a) Changing the argument once again. You stated that he said it's never the OS's fault. However, in your quote (that I requoted) I even showed you were he said the OS DOES have bugs. Since your statement was factually incorrect, your now trying to claim a different reason for your quote.

b) You picked two threads out of thousands to make your point. Smilin is one of the best posters in this forum. All I've seen you do is change your story as your comments are proven false.

c) I ask you again what you hope to gain from prolonging this thread.

You still won't admit that a feature was removed that some users found useful. You dismiss this as that nobody needed the feature and that we should all just be happy with what Microsoft has provided because it's perfect.

I post it one more time since your still have trouble with it:

I'll give it to you in steps since you STILL are missing the point:

1. Firefox not acting as default browser even though it should be.

2. Re-installing Firefox several times does NOT fix the problem and it does NOT appear like this: http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/werk/defaults.JPG ....cannot manually force it to appear.

3. Vista dialog boxes are unable to set Firefox as default, protocols http, https and ftp are listed but cannot be changed.

4. Notice advance edit dialog is MISSING.

5. Install third party app and quickly fix the problem.


I've solved the problem and proved my point beyond a shadow of a doubt that vista has removed the advance edit dialog box. I stand by my opinion that I want, need and like the advance dialog box and think it sucks that Microsoft has removed it.

===LOCK THREAD===

 

[bsobel]

You still won't admit that a feature was removed that some users found useful. You dismiss this as that nobody needed the feature and that we should all just be happy with what Microsoft has provided because it's perfect.

You just put a lot of words in my mouth which I did not say. I do admit it was removed and some user found it usefull. What I said was, I understand why it was removed and it is NOT as usefull to the majority of users as you think it is. Do I think you are inconvienced, yes, do I think the majority of windows users are, no.

As for firefox, you have some issue on your box, at this point it's hard to tell what is causing it since you wont give us more data. But to be clear, it works for everyone else. What it is about the FF installer on your box that is preventing this from working, I don't know. But you pretty much ensenuated the other user who posted the jpg was lying. He's not, it's working for others.

You really do have an attitude problem, you really should re-read this thread and maybe not be so hostile (IMHO).

Btw, don't think it's your call on locking the thread 😉