JimH wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..

If your daughter is up to the task, she can ask HP for a free Install
Disk for Vista and do a clean install in the HP. Without all of the
junk they preload in their machines it will run faster,just not as fast
as it would with WinXP. HP might be willing to sell her a XP install
disk at a reasonable price.

My daughter is happy with the new computer and Vista. It replaced a
clunky, very old desktop that was still working, running Windows '98.

*I* am the one that happened to notice that it runs somewhat sluggishly
compared to the older, HP Pavilion that I use (running XP) or my wife's
laptop .... also a HP Pavilion, but the model optimized for "Multimedia".
It also runs XP.

Like Harry suggested, my daughter's new computer may be shy some RAM and
may have a bunch of applications running in the background that slows it
down. But that was not my point.

My point was that for the average computer user who has limited knowledge
of how to optimize a computer, Vista may be somewhat disappointing, even
in a new computer shipped with Vista as the OS. Many people treat a
computer like a toaster. Plug it in and use it. Not all people have the
knowledge of how to optimize it, add memory, etc., nor do they care.
They expect it to work, as advertised.

That's why I think Vista is having a poor introduction.

Eisboch
Actually a computer really should run like a toaster, you plug it in and
it works. One may need to learn how to use specific software applications,
but it should not take a geek to run the computer. I am sure she has a
many applications running in the background that she does not need, it is
common with HP, Dell and others. But you probably have more applications
running in the background than she does, since yours is an older computer
and these new background applications do have a tendency to grow every
time you install a new program.

Any computer, regardless of the OS it is running, initially needs tweaking
so it can reach it's full speed potential.




There's a bit of space between plugging in and operating a bread toaster
and plugging in and operating a desktop or laptop computer, but I'm sure
this is all lost on a smug know-it-all asshole like Reggie.

On Apr 6, 7:21*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:



More like BOB

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hyjEGkm-A

And how would you know about BOB?

HMMMM?

commercials on TV, man...


Actually if you want to know the truth, I found the instructions while
dumpster diving in your trash can.....

On Apr 6, 8:16*am, wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 05:13:48 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote:

More like BOB

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8hyjEGkm-A

Wrong BOB. MS came out with a... wait for it... dumbed down version of Windows
they called BOB. Looked like it was designed by Mr. Rogers in collaboration with
Fisher-Price. It was a major flop, but subsequent versions of Windows have
interfaces that look more and more like BOB, with vivid, cartoonish, brightly
colored rounded icons, etc.

I thought I was in your bozo bin?

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..

If you install VISTA over an earlier OS instead of doing a clean install,
if you have a slow processor or less than two GIGs of RAM, if you don't
know what you are doing with a computer, then you are likely to have
VISTA-related problems.

VISTA has had its share of "VISTA-unique" problems, as has every other
maintstream desktop computer OS. The complaints I find funniest are those
from the know-nothings who bitch that "VISTA is slower than XP." Slower?
Oh...you mean your word processor, email reader, and instant messenger
work slowly? No? Oh...you read a benchmark. Yawn.



How about the average computer user who does not have advanced computer
skills or even the technical knowledge of what to buy?
My daughter recently replaced their computer with a new HP Pavilion laptop
preloaded with some version of Vista. They bought the best model they
could afford, but she doesn't know a megabit from a horsefly.

I was playing with it the other day. It just doesn't have the "snap"
opening programs or even simple navigation to files or folders that my 4
year old HP Pavilion running XP has. I neglected to check what her
processor type, speed or RAM capacity is, so it may not be a fair
comparison. Mine has a Pentium 4, 3.00GHz processor and 2.0 GB of RAM.
Next time I visit, I'll check and see what her new one has.

Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires
certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate
properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is
sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based
computers.

I also may not know what I am talking about, because my daughter's
computer .... which is only a month old .... is my first experience with
Vista. So, I am one of those "know-nothings" who claims Vista is slower
than XP. In this particular case, it *is* noticeably slower than the 4
year old computer I am using now.

Eisboch

Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one
box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants
or needs to be a computer expert. I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of
component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the
years.

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 11:19:24 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Point is, to us non-hobbyist or geeks, it seems that if Vista requires
certain minimums in terms of processors and RAM capacity to operate
properly, (which I am sure raises the cost of the computer) Microsoft is
sorta screwing many customers by forcing Vista onto all new Windows based
computers.

Yep. And geeks go through a growth cycle. They reach a point where
they reject other geeks foisting unnecessary geekiness upon them.
At that stage they turn to voluntary simplicity.
XP will suffice, or for some even Win98.
I personally resent tiny cell phone buttons.
What's that all about?

--Vic

"Jim" wrote in message
...



Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one
box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone
wants or needs to be a computer expert. I used to be a computer F.E. in
the day of component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has
changed over the years.

When home PC's were first becoming popular (and pre-Windows), I was really
interested in them. I built and modified a few home brews and messed around
with learning Basic, Fortran, "C" and Visual Basic for early GUI
applications. But, the technology advanced so quickly over the years and
since computers/programming was not my primary means of making a living, I
was soon left far behind in both knowledge, skill and frankly interest.

Still, today it is one of the few mass produced consumer products that it's
industry depends on the customer to troubleshoot and debug ... mostly
related to software. No other product would get away with it.

Eisboch

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:18:30 -0400, "Jim" wrote:


Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one
box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants
or needs to be a computer expert.

Exactly my feelings.

I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of
component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the
years.

Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business.
Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly.

--Vic


Hmmm. I'm sort of the opposite.

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:18:30 -0400, "Jim" wrote:



Computers should be as easy to use as a shovel. Shovel the data out of one
box, look at it, stir it up, shovel it into another box. Not everyone wants
or needs to be a computer expert.

Exactly my feelings.

I used to be a computer F.E. in the day of
component level troubleshooting. Obviously my viewpoint has changed over the
years.

Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business.
Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly.

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:55:43 -0400, HK wrote:

Same here. Used to like messing with it when it was my business.
Now I'm a user, and like it real user friendly.

--Vic

Hmmm. I'm sort of the opposite.

Another way to look at it: I used to like doing my own car repairs.
Hands on, saved some money, and had a reliable ride.
That was necessary with those older cars.
Now I expect my cars to be almost maintenance free.
I resent a bad injector, or too many "check engine" lights.
I put Vista in that category - just from what I've heard.
XP fits more into my current car philosophy - beat it death and it
keeps on doing everything I ask of it.
Not talking avoiding regular preventative maintenance, but I don't
want to be babying an OS like I babied my old cars.
Might be some flaws in that analogy, but there it is.
The older I get, the less I like to putz around with things I consider
simple tools. An OS is basically a complex mass of code, and I spent
years dealing with such for pay, and I'm tired of it.
That's why I retired.

--Vic


Whatever floats.

I had far more serious problems with XP, by the way, than I have had so
far with VISTA.

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 17:24:14 -0400, HK wrote:


I had far more serious problems with XP, by the way, than I have had so
far with VISTA.

Hard to imagine problems with XP - I can't think of one I've had.
I did start with SP2 though.
And I always investigate peripheral compatibility before I buy.
What issues did you encounter?

--Vic

I started with an early beta, but I flushed each old version before
installing the newer beta.
I had some software incompatibilities with programs that were supposed
to work with XP. Seriously. And one hardware problem with a USB
proprietary card reader. I never got these problems resolved.
Fortunately I had my Win2k laptop around and everything worked on it.

Hell, I even got my ancient scanner to work with VISTA with an old, old,
old driver!