Why does Windows suck so much?

[Hugh Jass]

You install a new program and you can't run it because of a cryptic error message. Turns out you need Visual C++ runtime libraries. Isn't that made by Microsoft? Why wouldn't they just include it with the OS?

Okay, let's hunt for that installer. Do I need 2008, 2010, 2012, or 2013? Because they're all completely different and not included in the same installer. No, that would make too much sense. Do you need 64-bit or 32-bit? Because they're also different, incompatible, and not included in the same archive or with the OS.

Oops, I downloaded the update for Visual Studio, not the runtime libraries. Let's go back to that website and hunt through a list longer than my arm. What's SP1? No, I do not want to install the Bing Bar, asshole.

Of course they couldn't just include it with Windows Update. That would be too convenient.

And Windows Update. Man, this piece of crap. You have to run it, download, install, restart, run it, download, install, restart, run it, download, install, restart. Repeat this 20 more times and just maybe you'll have all the necessary updates. Maybe.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

He had angry sex with Rosie, most likely.

I was going to ask if anyone answered in correct ATOT fashion "Because you touch yourself at night." but that is close enough. Well done, I salute you.

 

[dougp]

I was going to ask if anyone answered in correct ATOT fashion "Because you touch yourself at night." but that is close enough. Well done, I salute you.

The real question is if it was Rosie the Robot from the Jetsons or Rosie O'Donnell. Rakh, can you tell us who is colder in bed?

 

[BUTCH1]

Every OS has a few issues that annoy, that being said I've never had an issue installing anything and oh, wrong forum.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I hate Steam. And I'd say it's Microsoft's job to distribute products made by Microsoft.

The product wasn't made by Microsoft. Oh and because you're apparently so incredibly stupid, I need to clarify. Civilization Beyond Earth was not made by Microsoft and that's the product.

I notice you completely ignore people pointing out that it's likely that you're installing a pirated version of the game.

 

[Rakehellion]

The product wasn't made by Microsoft. Oh and because you're apparently so incredibly stupid, I need to clarify. Civilization Beyond Earth was not made by Microsoft and that's the product.

I notice you completely ignore people pointing out that it's likely that you're installing a pirated version of the game.

Stop being retarded, you retard. The game isn't the software with a distribution problem.

 

[Rakehellion]

So far we've established:
-I corrupted my Windows installation
-Microsoft isn't allowed to distribute their own libraries
-I'm a pirate
-I used the installer wrong
-All software in existence is bundle with an installer


Did I miss anything?

In the event that none of these things are true, I'm sure you'll still pull some mental gymnastics to make me at fault here.

 

[sdifox]

So far we've established:
-I corrupted my Windows installation
-Microsoft isn't allowed to distribute their own libraries
-I'm a pirate
-I used the installer wrong
-All software in existence is bundle with an installer


Did I miss anything?

In the event that none of these things are true, I'm sure you'll still pull some mental gymnastics to make me at fault here.

you forgot slimy beef

 

[Muse]

What are you doing to make the MSVCR get fucked up? Civ:BE's installer has the proper MSVCR dependency included and will install it if needed. Your machine is reporting to the installer that it doesn't need it. You obviously installed something that screwed up the dependent MSVCR that Civ:BE is expecting at some point in time - that's on you, not Windows.

ie: It's your job not to install stuff that fucks up Windows in the first place.

Uh, really? And how am I supposed to know what will and what will not fuck up Windows? Purveyors of software do not include a warning that installing their software is apt to trash your OS. It's on the OS developers to protect system files and incorporate internal repair mechanisms. I have to think that this certainly should apply to Windows Updates, which I am absolutely unable to do on this machine, and it's been well over a year since I could. The only strategies I can think of are occasional if not frequent backups of the entire system, before things get so fucked up that it's a lost cause. In the case of this machine the OS appears to be beyond repair. If there is a repair scenario, I haven't found it, and I did look. You can say I fucked up, but you have no evidence that it wasn't Microsoft that fucked up, not me.

 

[dougp]

Uh, really? And how am I supposed to know what will and what will not fuck up Windows? Purveyors of software do not include a warning that installing their software is apt to trash your OS. It's on the OS developers to protect system files and incorporate internal repair mechanisms. I have to think that this certainly should apply to Windows Updates, which I am absolutely unable to do on this machine, and it's been well over a year since I could. The only strategies I can think of are occasional if not frequent backups of the entire system, before things get so fucked up that it's a lost cause. In the case of this machine the OS appears to be beyond repair. If there is a repair scenario, I haven't found it, and I did look. You can say I fucked up, but you have no evidence that it wasn't Microsoft that fucked up, not me.

1) MS incorporated UAC to allow you to know when software is accessing and/or modifying system files. Many people consider this a nuisance and turn it off or lower it. Same goes for the internet zones & Java. Safeguards exist, people choose to disable them.

2) There are internal repair mechanisms in place, but they can be shut down or disabled by OEMs. I've seen system restore disabled by Dell, and a lot of SSD utilities will disable them to give you max space.

3) For Windows Update, have you used their troubleshooting page that provides a utility to determine why it's screwed up?

Windows and Linux allow full access to all files - and I'd argue that Linux allows a newbie to really FUBAR their system far easier than Windows does.

 

[Muse]

Apparently Microsoft. They have transcended this mortal coil to achieve absolute perfection. None of their products have bugs or flaws of any kind. All who doubt the iron fist of Billy Boy are inferior specimens and must be destroyed.

My task at this point is to stop using all programs that only run under Windows, doable but difficult. I have a lot of data that I use all the time that AFAIK is limited to Windows usage. Some can be converted to forms that non-Windows dependent software can run, but I'd have to learn new software to make use of this. Add to these considerations the fact that Windows backwards compatibility gets thinner and thinner from release to release. I use one program that doesn't work OK in Windows 7, does in XP. My XP machines warn me that I have to upgrade. Pisses me off. My desktop won't even run Windows 7, the motherboard wasn't designed for it.

 

[Muse]

1) MS incorporated UAC to allow you to know when software is accessing and/or modifying system files. Many people consider this a nuisance and turn it off or lower it. Same goes for the internet zones & Java. Safeguards exist, people choose to disable them.

2) There are internal repair mechanisms in place, but they can be shut down or disabled by OEMs. I've seen system restore disabled by Dell, and a lot of SSD utilities will disable them to give you max space.

3) For Windows Update, have you used their troubleshooting page that provides a utility to determine why it's screwed up?

Windows and Linux allow full access to all files - and I'd argue that Linux allows a newbie to really FUBAR their system far easier than Windows does.

I don't turn off the warnings, but they pop up every time I install anything or update anything or even open many of my programs. For instance, I'm a paid customer of a company whose software (ThinkorSwim) is updated just about once a week, and every time I open this software (whether there's been a change from last time or not) I'm warned that it might fuck things up. I click the button that gets me past the warning screen as fast as I can and proceed to open the program. I talked to the software's support and was told that the updates they do require that the warnings will continue or they could not purvey the software.

I see warnings all the time, and what am I to conclude? Many times it's installations associated with hardware and the manufacturer tells you to ignore warnings. It gets to be a habit, a virtual necessity of computing to ignore those warnings.

I believe I did download and run the troubleshooting utility but didn't get anywhere with it. I guess I can try again, but I'm not optimistic. I think I saw some files somewhere indicating I just might have a backup of this machine, I have to look into that too.

 

[mikeymikec]

Why doesn't your software provide a direct link to the libraries needed?

Yep, I would have thought that if someone used say Visual C++ 2008 to compile then having VisualC+ 2008 runtime on the client would be logical and advisable.

I sure wish my win7 had shipped with visual c++ 2013 run times. Sometimes I think Microsoft is just not including this crap to be difficult.

Yes, I often wonder why an OS made in 2009 didn't ship with binaries from 2013. Those BASTARDS!

Software Update on Mac only needs to run once and it's done.

Except of course when it doesn't work and the error message is.... "an error occurred".

 

[Bob the Coder]

Works on my machine

 

[Bob the Coder]

So far we've established:
-I corrupted my Windows installation
-Microsoft isn't allowed to distribute their own libraries
-I'm a pirate
-I used the installer wrong
-All software in existence is bundle with an installer


Did I miss anything?

In the event that none of these things are true, I'm sure you'll still pull some mental gymnastics to make me at fault here.

Care to address the pirating accusation directly?

Is the copy you're installing 100% legit and in the format/package the publisher released?

 

[dougp]

I don't turn off the warnings, but they pop up every time I install anything or update anything or even open many of my programs. For instance, I'm a paid customer of a company whose software (ThinkorSwim) is updated just about once a week, and every time I open this software (whether there's been a change from last time or not) I'm warned that it might fuck things up. I click the button that gets me past the warning screen as fast as I can and proceed to open the program. I talked to the software's support and was told that the updates they do require that the warnings will continue or they could not purvey the software.

I see warnings all the time, and what am I to conclude? Many times it's installations associated with hardware and the manufacturer tells you to ignore warnings. It gets to be a habit, a virtual necessity of computing to ignore those warnings.

I believe I did download and run the troubleshooting utility but didn't get anywhere with it. I guess I can try again, but I'm not optimistic. I think I saw some files somewhere indicating I just might have a backup of this machine, I have to look into that too.

Most of the time when you receive UAC warnings, it's because the application is running in Admin mode - pretty sure you knew that. If it's a typical application that you're always running, that means it's trying to access areas that MS has advised developers not to write to. There's a lot of applications that still avoid using AppData or ProgramData to store information.

 

[ultimatebob]

A good Windows software installer will check for prerequisite libraries like .NET runtime and Direct X and download/install them FOR you.

If you have to hunt for these files yourself, your software provider FAILED at properly QA testing the product installation. Shame on them.

I know that Steam does this correctly as well. Other software companies should learn from their example.

 

[Muse]

Most of the time when you receive UAC warnings, it's because the application is running in Admin mode - pretty sure you knew that. If it's a typical application that you're always running, that means it's trying to access areas that MS has advised developers not to write to. There's a lot of applications that still avoid using AppData or ProgramData to store information.

I confess to running my machine as an admin. I know that's not recommended but I haven't gone through the hoops of running in non-admin mode and only running admin when necessary. Is this what you are referring to?

 

[ultimatebob]

Click here to find out why Microsoft HATES him!!

Use this ONE TRICK to solve your Windows problems!









One Trick = Use a Mac or Linux

 

[dougp]

I confess to running my machine as an admin. I know that's not recommended but I haven't gone through the hoops of running in non-admin mode and only running admin when necessary. Is this what you are referring to?

No, it means that you allow the program to run as administrator, giving it write access to C:\Windows and C:\Program Files | C:\Program Files (x86) as well as root access. It could be because of an auto update and directly write files, or they could be storing config items, or even writing to locked registry entries.

 

[poofyhairguy]

One Trick = Use a Mac or Linux

In this day and age if someone can't grok Windows then they need to be on iOS.

 

[Muse]

No, it means that you allow the program to run as administrator, giving it write access to C:\Windows and C:\Program Files | C:\Program Files (x86) as well as root access. It could be because of an auto update and directly write files, or they could be storing config items, or even writing to locked registry entries.

I haven't knowingly given any programs those abilities, but confess that I usually do not read those warning messages, I just click OK. It seems that what appears to be the most innocuous action can bring up those messages.

 

[ultimatebob]

In this day and age if someone can't grok Windows then they need to be on iOS.

Mac OS X seems to be pretty idiot proofed as well, though. I treat my Macbook almost like it's a kitchen appliance, as everything auto updates and no maintenance is usually needed.

 

[Kadarin]

Mac is for teenage girls.

You say this in a thread where you're complaining about Windows sucking so much?

Disclaimer: Typing this post on an iMac where I don't worry about spyware, have to go through Windows Update hell, where software just installs without issue, where I have a real shell with Unix tools to do real work.

 

[CoPhotoGuy]

shrug, mine works fine. Why doesn't your software provide a direct link to the libraries needed? Seems that would be more efficient.

Try setting vCenter up with SQL 2012 on 2008R2 servers.

VC works fine with SQL 2012 if you're on 5.5.

But anyway, blame the software vendor. If their software requires a VC redist package then it should be included with the software, treated as a prerequisite and automatically installed before their software is so that when you are done it works.