From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01CC_01C666C4.199C1380
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   It follows the user's request to elevate in the dialog I referenced.  =
If you can't remember the context from one moment to the next you have =
more serious problems then your lack of honesty and insistence to cast =
aspersions at something you have never used based on someone else's =
comments you do not understand.

Rich

  "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message =
news:nndn42l664bqa8qmin54oeocd9term9gaj{at}4ax.com...

  I looked at this dialog here:
  http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg

  Not the epitome of clarity, eh?  In actuality, I think it's rather
  telling that a dialog *that* badly worded is still present this far =
into
  the Vista release cycle.

  So, the question remains, will Microsoft fix this mess before they
  release Vista to consumers?  Or will Microsoft turn off consumers to =
the
  concept of UAP because the bolt-on after-the-fact implementation of =
UAP
  in Vista is so bad?

    /m


  On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:31:10 -0700, "Rich"  wrote:

  >   Accept responsibility for your own words and stop lying.
  >
  >   If you wish to see how clearly worded the dialog is look at it.  I =
included the link and so have you yet you would fail to or pretend to =
fail to look and instead lie about it.
  >
  >Rich
  >
  >  "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message =
news:67um42ddv89viigs3am7abtht4oj6p4bvf{at}4ax.com...
  >
  >  >Instead of keeping quiet or acknowledging that you don't=20
  >  > understand you make up bullshit and post it as your own.
  >
  >  > In the future mike, you might want to try at least to=20
  >  > present the appearence of honesty by avoiding making=20
  >  > statements on topics about which you have no experience
  >  > or knowledge.
  >
  >
  >
  >  When I say, "From the article" it means that I am quoting from the
  >  article.
  >
  >
  >  btw, you comment:
  >
  >  >On Vista, the user doesn't have administrator access so the =
operation fails.  The article shows a picture of the clearly worded = dialog at =
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg.  The =
user has a choice how to proceed.  One of which is to elevate to =
administrator and continue the operation.
  >
  >
  >  I notice you left out one of the the other "clearly worded" =
dialogs:
  >
  >  http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg
  >  From the article, "Here, you need to give your permission to =
continue
  >  something opaquely called a 'File Operation.'"
  >
  >  (note to Rich, the preceeding was taken from the article, I am not
  >  making this up))
  >
  >  My opinion is that he was being kind.  Permission is needed to use =
a
  >  *program* called "File Operation"?  What is the executable for that
  >  program called?  File Operation?
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >  Here's another comment from the article:
  >  (note to Rich, I am quoting the article, I am not making this up.)
  >
  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >  One of the most highly-touted features of Windows Vista is glass
  >  windows, a part of the Windows Aero user interface. It sounds like =
a
  >  great idea, and heck, let's give Microsoft a bit of credit for the
  >  ingenuity of taking the windows metaphor to its logical conclusion.
  >  Maybe Apple can add stained glass windows to the next version of =
Mac OS
  >  X in response.
  >
  >  Anyway, the reality of glass windows is that they stink. The =
windows
  >  themselves are translucent, meaning you can see through them =
partially.
  >  But the visual difference between the topmost window (that is, the
  >  window with which you are currently interacting, or what we might
  >  describe as the window with focus) and any other windows (i.e. =
those
  >  windows that are visually located "under" the topmost window) is =
subtle
  >  at best. More to the point, you can't tell topmost windows from =
other
  >  windows at all. And don't pretend you can.
  >
  >  Let's look at an example. Here are two windows in Windows Vista, =
viewed
  >  side-by-side. Quick: Which one is the top-most window? You have a =
50
  >  percent chance of getting it right, so don't pat yourself on the =
back if
  >  you chose the right one quite yet. The truth is, neither one is
  >  particularly differentiated from the other....
  >
  >  Glass windows sound like a great idea, until you actually use them.
  >  Surely Microsoft can do better than this....
  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >
  >
  >  Yup, surely Microsoft *could* do better.  They, after all, hire the =
best
  >  and the brightest.  The question is why don't they do better than =
this?
  >
  >  (note to Rich, the preceeding paragraph was my comment, and not =
from the
  >  article.)
  >
  >    /m
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >  On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 16:17:14 -0700, "Rich"  wrote:
  >
  >  >   Again you demonstrate that your personal honesty isn't =
important to you.  Not only have you not used Vista you don't understand =
what the article is describing.  Instead of keeping quiet or =
acknowledging that you don't understand you make up bullshit and post it =
as your own.
  >  >
  >  >   For anyone reading this that cares about what is going on, the =
previous description is very relevant
  >  >
  >  >  Once Firefox is installed, there are two icons on my Desktop I'd =
like to remove: The Setup application itself and a shortcut to Firefox. =
So I select both icons and drag them to the Recycle Bin. Simple, right?
  >  >  Wrong. Here's what you have to go through to actually delete =
those files in Windows Vista. First, you get a File Access Denied dialog =
(Figure) explaining that you don't, in fact, have permission to delete a =
... shortcut?? To an application you just installed??? Seriously?=20
  >  >
  >  >
  >  >His annoyance is understandable.  Firefox's installer is poorly =
behaved.  Instead of adding a shortcut to the desktop of existing users =
and the default profile for new users it adds it to the single =
administrator restricted all users profile.  This is an unfriendly = choice
on Windows XP and earlier releases too.  Why?  Because individual = users
have no choice.  The icon must be removed by an administrator only = from
all desktops or none.  On Vista, the user doesn't have = administrator
access so the operation fails.  The article shows a = picture of the
clearly worded dialog at =
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg.  The =
user has a choice how to proceed.  One of which is to elevate to =
administrator and continue the operation.
  >  >
  >  >   In the future mike, you might want to try at least to present =
the appearence of honesty by avoiding making statements on topics about =
which you have no experience or knowledge.
  >  >
  >  >Rich
  >  >
  >  >
  >  >  "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message =
news:lq3l42hccq0251d92p74gstoovk3sospcn{at}4ax.com...
  >  >
  >  >  From the article:
  >  >
  >  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >  >  What if you're doing something a bit more complicated? Well, =
lucky you,
  >  >  the dialogs stack right up, one after the other, in a seemingly
  >  >  never-ending display of stupidity. Indeed, sometimes you'll find
  >  >  yourself unable to do certain things for no good reason, and you =
click
  >  >  Allow buttons until you're blue in the face. It will never stop
  >  >  bothering you, unless you agree to stop your silliness and leave =
that
  >  >  file on the desktop where it belongs. Mark my words, this will =
happen to
  >  >  you. And you will hate it.
  >  >  =3D=3D=3D
  >  >
  >  >   /m
  >  >
  >  >
  >  >  On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:15:36 -0700, "Rich"  wrote:
  >  >
  >  >  >   I read the article before you felt compelled to quote =
negative excerpts from it and am capable of distinguishing between that =
and your personal bullshit.  Aren't you? =20
  >  >  >
  >  >  >   Vista does not prompt for elevation multiple times for a =
single task and the article didn't claim it did.  Given that you have =
never used Vista why would you personally make false claims?  Isn't =
personal honesty an issue for you?
  >  >  >
  >  >  >   I have no doubt you see what you want to see.  If we are to =
judge by the propaganda you post here, it clearly shows that you are =
blind to anything that doesn't take a negative position that you would =
like to agree with.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >Rich
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  "Mike '/m'"  wrote in message =
news:eo6k42h77i0u1eq3mf192tgi0k3im39ib6{at}4ax.com...
  >  >  >  On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:51:46 -0700, "Rich"
 wrote:
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  > Bullshit!  I suspect you haven't used Vista or Vista with=20
  >  >  >  > UAP so your comments are plucked from your ass.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  Partially correct.  I have not used Vista.  However, the =
comments I
  >  >  >  posted were taken from an article written by someone who had =
been using
  >  >  >  Vista, someone who has been very pro-Windows.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  > OS X prompting is very similarly.  I haven't played with=20
  >  >  >  > OS X much but from what I did see it is identical in the=20
  >  >  >  > model for when to prompt.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  Sorry, Rich, OS-X does prompt once for each Administrative =
task, not
  >  >  >  several times throughout the task as the article I quoted =
indicates
  >  >  >  about Vista.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  In the rush to get Vista out the door eventually, it is =
looking like
  >  >  >  many short cuts have been taken and are continuing to be =
taken;
  >  >  >  resulting in, among other things, the annoying behavior of =
endless
  >  >  >  prompts cited in the article I quoted. =20
  >  >  >
  >  >  >  The comments I have been seeing from Windows cheerleaders =
about Vista's
  >  >  >  shortcomings and unmet promises are growing in number and =
volume.  If
  >  >  >  you don't like that, then you perhaps you should listen to =
what they are
  >  >  >  saying and get your employer to fix the problem.  =
Unfortuantely that may
  >  >  >  mean even more delays for Vista which so far has had the =
gestation
  >  >  >  period of an elephant.  Vista will probably be as bulky with =
it is
  >  >  >  finally born.
  >  >  >
  >  >  >   /m
------=_NextPart_000_01CC_01C666C4.199C1380
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   It
follows the user's =
request to=20
elevate in the dialog I referenced.  If you can't remember the =
context from=20
one moment to the next you have more serious problems then your lack of = honesty=20
and insistence to cast aspersions at something you have never used based = on=20
someone else's comments you do not understand.
 
Rich
 

  "Mike '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>=20">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>=20
  wrote in message news:nndn42l664b=
qa8qmin54oeocd9term9gaj{at}4ax.com...I=20
  looked at this dialog here:http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg=
">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg=
R>Not=20
  the epitome of clarity, eh?  In actuality, I think it's =
rathertelling=20
  that a dialog *that* badly worded is still present this far =
intothe Vista=20
  release cycle.So, the question remains, will Microsoft fix =
this mess=20
  before theyrelease Vista to consumers?  Or will Microsoft =
turn off=20
  consumers to theconcept of UAP because the bolt-on after-the-fact=20
  implementation of UAPin Vista is so bad?  =
/mOn=20
  Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:31:10 -0700, "Rich" <{at}>=20
  wrote:>   Accept
responsibility for your own =
words and=20
  stop lying.>>   If
you wish to see how clearly =
worded=20
  the dialog is look at it.  I included the link and so have you =
yet you=20
  would fail to or pretend to fail to look and instead lie about=20
 
it.>>Rich>> 
"Mike '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>
wrote in =
message news:67um42ddv89=
viigs3am7abtht4oj6p4bvf{at}4ax.com...>> =20
  >Instead of keeping quiet or acknowledging that you don't =
> =20
  > understand you make up bullshit and post it as your=20
  own.>>  > In the future
mike, you might want to =
try at=20
  least to >  > present the appearence of
honesty by =
avoiding=20
  making >  > statements on topics about
which you have =
no=20
  experience>  > or=20
 
knowledge.>>>> 
When I say, "From the =

  article" it means that I am quoting from the> =20
  article.>>>  btw, you =
comment:>> =20
  >On Vista, the user doesn't have administrator access so the =
operation=20
  fails.  The article shows a picture of the clearly worded dialog =
at http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg=
">.&" target="new">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg.&=
nbsp;=20
  The user has a choice how to proceed.  One of which is to elevate =
to=20
  administrator and continue the =
operation.>>>  I=20
  notice you left out one of the the other "clearly worded"=20
  dialogs:>>  http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg=
">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_01.jpg=
R>> =20
  From the article, "Here, you need to give your permission to=20
  continue>  something opaquely called a 'File=20
  Operation.'">>  (note to
Rich, the preceeding was =
taken=20
  from the article, I am not>  making this=20
  up))>>  My opinion is that he
was being kind.  =

  Permission is needed to use a>  *program*
called "File=20
  Operation"?  What is the executable for
that>  =
program=20
  called?  File=20
 
Operation?>>>>>> 
=
Here's=20
  another comment from the article:>  (note to Rich, I am =
quoting=20
  the article, I am not making this
up.)>>  =
=3D=3D=3D> =20
  One of the most highly-touted features of Windows Vista is =
glass> =20
  windows, a part of the Windows Aero user interface. It sounds like=20
  a>  great idea, and heck, let's give Microsoft a bit of =
credit for=20
  the>  ingenuity of taking the windows metaphor to its =
logical=20
  conclusion.>  Maybe Apple can add stained glass
windows to =
the=20
  next version of Mac OS>  X in =
response.>> =20
  Anyway, the reality of glass windows is that they stink. The=20
  windows>  themselves are translucent, meaning
you can see =
through=20
  them partially.>  But the visual difference between the =
topmost=20
  window (that is, the>  window with which you
are currently =

  interacting, or what we might>  describe as the window =
with focus)=20
  and any other windows (i.e. those>  windows that are =
visually=20
  located "under" the topmost window) is
subtle>  at best. =
More to=20
  the point, you can't tell topmost windows from other>  =
windows at=20
  all. And don't pretend you
can.>>  Let's look at an =

  example. Here are two windows in Windows Vista,
viewed> =20
  side-by-side. Quick: Which one is the top-most window? You have a=20
  50>  percent chance of getting it right, so don't pat =
yourself on=20
  the back if>  you chose the right one quite
yet. The truth =
is,=20
  neither one is>  particularly differentiated from the=20
  other....>>  Glass windows
sound like a great idea, =
until=20
  you actually use them.>  Surely Microsoft can do better =
than=20
  this....> 
=3D=3D=3D>>> 
Yup, =
surely Microsoft=20
  *could* do better.  They, after all, hire the
best>  =
and the=20
  brightest.  The question is why don't they do better than=20
  this?>>  (note to Rich, the
preceeding paragraph =
was my=20
  comment, and not from the> =20
  article.)>>   =20
 
/m>>>>> 
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 =
16:17:14=20
  -0700, "Rich" <{at}>
wrote:>> 
>   =
Again=20
  you demonstrate that your personal honesty isn't important to =
you.  Not=20
  only have you not used Vista you don't understand what the article is=20
  describing.  Instead of keeping quiet or acknowledging that you =
don't=20
  understand you make up bullshit and post it as your
own.>  =

  >>  >   For
anyone reading this that cares =
about=20
  what is going on, the previous description is very =
relevant> =20
  >>  >  Once Firefox is
installed, there are two =
icons=20
  on my Desktop I'd like to remove: The Setup application itself and a =
shortcut=20
  to Firefox. So I select both icons and drag them to the Recycle Bin. =
Simple,=20
  right?>  >  Wrong. Here's what
you have to go =
through to=20
  actually delete those files in Windows Vista. First, you get a File =
Access=20
  Denied dialog (Figure) explaining that you don't, in fact, have =
permission to=20
  delete a ... shortcut?? To an application you just installed??? =
Seriously?=20
  >  >> 
>>  >His annoyance =
is=20
  understandable.  Firefox's installer is poorly behaved.  =
Instead of=20
  adding a shortcut to the desktop of existing users and the default =
profile for=20
  new users it adds it to the single administrator restricted all users=20
  profile.  This is an unfriendly choice on Windows XP and earlier =
releases=20
  too.  Why?  Because individual users have no choice.  =
The icon=20
  must be removed by an administrator only from all desktops or =
none.  On=20
  Vista, the user doesn't have administrator access so the operation=20
  fails.  The article shows a picture of the clearly worded dialog =
at http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg=
">.&" target="new">http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista_5342_rev5_00.jpg.&=
nbsp;=20
  The user has a choice how to proceed.  One of which is to elevate =
to=20
  administrator and continue the operation.>  =
>> =20
  >   In the future mike, you might want to try at
least to =
present=20
  the appearence of honesty by avoiding making statements on topics =
about which=20
  you have no experience or knowledge.> 
>> =20
  >Rich> 
>>  >>  =
>  "Mike=20
  '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:lq3l42hccq0=
251d92p74gstoovk3sospcn{at}4ax.com...> =20
  >>  >  From the
article:> =20
  >>  > 
=3D=3D=3D>  >  What =
if you're=20
  doing something a bit more complicated? Well, lucky
you,>  =

  >  the dialogs stack right up, one after the other, in a=20
  seemingly>  >  never-ending
display of stupidity. =
Indeed,=20
  sometimes you'll find>  > 
yourself unable to do =
certain=20
  things for no good reason, and you click> 
>  =
Allow=20
  buttons until you're blue in the face. It will never =
stop> =20
  >  bothering you, unless you agree to stop your silliness and =
leave=20
  that>  >  file on the desktop
where it belongs. =
Mark my=20
  words, this will happen to>  > 
you. And you will =
hate=20
  it.>  > 
=3D=3D=3D>  =
>> =20
  >   /m> 
>>  =
>> =20
  >  On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:15:36 -0700, "Rich"
<{at}>=20
  wrote:>  >> 
>  >   I =
read the=20
  article before you felt compelled to quote negative excerpts from it =
and am=20
  capable of distinguishing between that and your personal =
bullshit. =20
  Aren't you?  >  > 
>>  =
> =20
  >   Vista does not prompt for elevation multiple times =
for a=20
  single task and the article didn't claim it did.  Given that you =
have=20
  never used Vista why would you personally make false claims?  =
Isn't=20
  personal honesty an issue for you?>  >  =
>> =20
  >  >   I have no doubt you see
what you want to=20
  see.  If we are to judge by the propaganda you post here, it =
clearly=20
  shows that you are blind to anything that doesn't take a negative =
position=20
  that you would like to agree with.>  >  =
>> =20
  >  >Rich> 
>  >>  =
> =20
  >  "Mike '/m'" <mike{at}barkto.com>">mailto:mike{at}barkto.com">mike{at}barkto.com>
wrote in =
message news:eo6k42h77i0=
u1eq3mf192tgi0k3im39ib6{at}4ax.com...> =20
  >  >  On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:51:46 -0700,
"Rich" =
<{at}>=20
  wrote:>  > 
>>  >  =
>  >=20
  Bullshit!  I suspect you haven't used Vista or Vista with =
> =20
  >  >  > UAP so your comments are
plucked from your=20
  ass.>  > 
>>  >  > 
=

  Partially correct.  I have not used Vista.  However, the =
comments=20
  I>  >  > 
posted were taken from an =
article=20
  written by someone who had been using> 
>  =
> =20
  Vista, someone who has been very pro-Windows.> 
>  =

  >>  > 
>>  >  > 
=
> OS=20
  X prompting is very similarly.  I haven't played with =
> =20
  >  >  > OS X much but from what I
did see it is =
identical=20
  in the >  >  > 
> model for when to=20
  prompt.>  > 
>>  >  =
> =20
  Sorry, Rich, OS-X does prompt once for each Administrative task,=20
  not>  >  > 
several times throughout the =
task as=20
  the article I quoted indicates> 
>  >  =
about=20
  Vista.>  > 
>>  >  =
>  In=20
  the rush to get Vista out the door eventually, it is looking=20
  like>  >  > 
many short cuts have been =
taken and=20
  are continuing to be taken;> 
>  >  =
resulting in,=20
  among other things, the annoying behavior of endless>  =
> =20
  >  prompts cited in the article I quoted. 
>  =

  >  >> 
>  >  The comments I =
have been=20
  seeing from Windows cheerleaders about Vista's>  =
> =20
  >  shortcomings and unmet promises are growing in number and=20
  volume.  If>  > 
>  you don't like =
that, then=20
  you perhaps you should listen to what they are>  =
> =20
  >  saying and get your employer to fix the problem. =20
  Unfortuantely that may>  > 
>  mean even =
more=20
  delays for Vista which so far has had the gestation>  =
> =20
  >  period of an elephant.  Vista will probably be as =
bulky with=20
  it is>  >  > 
finally born.> =20
  >  >> 
>  >  =20
/m

------=_NextPart_000_01CC_01C666C4.199C1380--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5