From: Mike '/m' 


>Instead of keeping quiet or acknowledging that you don't
> understand you make up bullshit and post it as your own.

> 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.



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.)

===
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....
===


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?
>
>
>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/vist a_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:
>
>  ===
>  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.
>  ===
>
>   /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?
>  >
>  >   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
>  >  > 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
>  >  > OS X much but from what I did see it is identical in the
>  >  > 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.
>  >
>  >  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

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