NationStates Jolt Archive

Right. So I've upgraded(or downgraded, depending on whom you ask...) my system with vista business. The first thing that strikes me, apart from the icons being twice as big as I would like, is the insane amount of pop-ups from the system. "Do you really wanna run that Daemon Tools, boy?" and the likes. Of course I wanna run that shit, otherwise I wouldn't have klicked on the damn icon!

Yes yes, fine, this is of course a dandy security thing in the UAC module of vista. I still fucking hate it and I wonder if there are any significant security risks with turning it off. Anyone got a clue? Cheers!

Right. So I've upgraded(or downgraded, depending on whom you ask...) my system with vista business. The first thing that strikes me, apart from the icons being twice as big as I would like, is the insane amount of pop-ups from the system. "Do you really wanna run that Daemon Tools, boy?" and the likes. Of course I wanna run that shit, otherwise I wouldn't have klicked on the damn icon!

Yes yes, fine, this is of course a dandy security thing in the UAC module of vista. I still fucking hate it and I wonder if there are any significant security risks with turning it off. Anyone got a clue? Cheers!
3 letters DRM
Security Matters
Why Vista's DRM Is Bad For You
Bruce Schneier 02.12.07, 6:00 AM ET

Windows Vista includes an array of "features" that you don't want. These features will make your computer less reliable and less secure. They'll make your computer less stable and run slower. They will cause technical support problems. They may even require you to upgrade some of your peripheral hardware and existing software. And these features won't do anything useful. In fact, they're working against you. They're digital rights management (DRM) features built into Vista at the behest of the entertainment industry.

And you don't get to refuse them.

http://www.forbes.com/security/2007/02/10/microsoft-vista-drm-tech-security-cz_bs_0212vista.html

even after they have ironed all the Bugs off..
3 facts will remain

#1 Vista carries the higest concentration of DRM ever.
#2 DRM is meant to help Hollywood and the RIAA.
#3 DRM slows down your Computer.

Hai!

http://lifehacker.com/software/vista/windows-vista-tip--disable-annoying-need-your-permission-to-continue-prompts-230866.php



But, as OceanDrive said, Vista ftl.

Worst part about it is that Microsoft will officially cease supporting Windows XP at the end of the year. I suppose that means soon after games designers will be forced to release games that can only run on Vista since presumably the Windows SDK and license won't be available to them any further.

Ugh, remind me to buy a Mac when I need a new computer so I can avoid this shit.

Ugh, remind me to buy a Mac when I need a new computer so I can avoid this shit.

Then you can be locked into iTunes!

Yes yes, fine, this is of course a dandy security thing in the UAC module of vista. I still fucking hate it and I wonder if there are any significant security risks with turning it off. Anyone got a clue? Cheers!
If you are not a muppet, and you rarely do obviously stupid things, you should be fine turning it off :)
(That's Vista's primary advantage over XP IMO; it's easy to turn this annoying "security feature" off >_<)

Worst part about it is that Microsoft will officially cease supporting Windows XP at the end of the year. I suppose that means soon after games designers will be forced to release games that can only run on Vista since presumably the Windows SDK and license won't be available to them any further.
Ah, the advantage of writing for the PC... You don't have to have Microsoft's say-so to release a Windows game, and the Platform SDK is easy to download in advance.

Where did you get the idea that XP support will be stopped at the end of the year? I found one article (http://apcmag.com/5835/vendors_in_no_rush_to_ditch_xp_for_vista) saying they'll stop selling it then, but from memory it'll still be supported (eg. security updates, etc.) for some years to come. Heck, they still support Win2K with basic updates.

Vista isn't too bad, so long as you have a good PC.

The security is annoying but it's caught more than one bug before I've had to run my security suite to get rd of it.

Also you can change the icon sizes and such with the properties menu, same as you ever could with Windows 95 onwards.

Large icons? Thats for the reading impaired j/k.

Ugh, remind me to buy a Mac when I need a new computer so I can avoid this shit.

It's not the hardware's fault.

If you are not a muppet, and you rarely do obviously stupid things, you should be fine turning it off :)
(That's Vista's primary advantage over XP IMO; it's easy to turn this annoying "security feature" off >_<)

You had to bring Kermit into this, didn't you? ;) Nah, I'm somewhat litterate when it comes to computers. Not the best when it comes to networking and security, that's all. I know how to keep my system safe the standard way. Now it's turned off anyway, thanks alot for all help!

It's not the hardware's fault.
True. Maybe I'll just attempt to build my own (I've never done that before... although since my next computer is likely to be a laptop, that would be a touch hard to build) or wipe out whatever OS is on there and put Linux on if I wind up with something I don't like.

Not buying another computer for another year, and I don't want to randomly drop over a hundred dollars for a machine whose use will shortly become rather...limited. For now, Vista means nothing to me.

The rejection of Vista is limited to two camps: one, the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither), and two, those who are afraid of change. It was exactly the same during the transition from 98SE to XP. Exactly. Same arguments and all. It'll pass within a year and almost everyone criticising Vista now will be using it (assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).

True. Maybe I'll just attempt to build my own (I've never done that before... although since my next computer is likely to be a laptop, that would be a touch hard to build) or wipe out whatever OS is on there and put Linux on if I wind up with something I don't like.

I've yet to build my own, but I've installed Linux on a desktop. Worked out OK, but there was some hardware incompatibility, which isn't fun (make sure the hardware has Linux drivers first). Also, most PC games won't run on Linux (if you have games in mind).

The rejection of Vista is limited to two camps: one, the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither), and two, those who are afraid of change. It was exactly the same during the transition from 98SE to XP. Exactly. Same arguments and all. It'll pass within a year and almost everyone criticising Vista now will be using it (assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).

So, everything new must be better than what's gone before, and must not be criticised?

And no, it wasn't exactly the same; there are significant differences between the NT and 9x kernels. Also, many people had already moved to 2K, which had all of the benefits of XP but with less fat.
The only important difference (no, aero doesn't count; it's just eye-candy) between 2K/XP and Vista is DirectX10, which could be ported to XP if they wanted. But they won't, because it will flog more copies of Vista this way. Or at least cause more to be pirated.

The rejection of Vista is limited to two camps: one, the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither), and two, those who are afraid of change. It was exactly the same during the transition from 98SE to XP. Exactly. Same arguments and all. It'll pass within a year and almost everyone criticising Vista now will be using it (assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).
I criticize Vista for many reasons but not the ones you mention. For one, I don't approve of releasing an OS before its bugs are at least 80% worked out...and that's just barely tolerable. I'll stick with my fully functional XP until Vista can claim the same level of functionality, thankyouverymuch. I like my world to work, and work well.

I'm a control freak when it comes to my computer and Vista takes too much of my control away. I use a lot of third party applications and I hate the idea of not being in control of what I can and cannot do on my computer. And yes, I have a legal copy of Vista but I refuse to install it for just that reason alone. XP SP2 is serving my needs well and doesn't try and override anything I do. Plus I am just very much against any form of DRM on my computer. I had enough of a headache when I had to deal with Starforce forcing itself onto my computer when I installed a game that was distributed free of charge (why they needed copyright on a free game is beyond me).

The rejection of Vista is limited to two camps: one, the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither), and two, those who are afraid of change. It was exactly the same during the transition from 98SE to XP. Exactly. Same arguments and all. It'll pass within a year and almost everyone criticising Vista now will be using it (assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).

I used 98 until last year. It was vastly vastly better than XP. I don't see the need for microsoft to hold my hand everytime I do everything nor to moniter how I use my files on my computer. To say nothing of the loss of performance from the OS using up so much more processor power.

I used 98 until last year. It was vastly vastly better than XP. I don't see the need for microsoft to hold my hand everytime I do everything nor to moniter how I use my files on my computer. To say nothing of the loss of performance from the OS using up so much more processor power.
I know what you mean. I'm only using XP because I needed to for academic reasons. I've come to terms with it and we've established a mutual peace. I don't mangle the system files and it don't bug me every 5 seconds.

I've yet to build my own, but I've installed Linux on a desktop. Worked out OK, but there was some hardware incompatibility, which isn't fun (make sure the hardware has Linux drivers first). Also, most PC games won't run on Linux (if you have games in mind).
I don't tend to play many games, though if I wanted to I could always just dual boot the thing...

I don't tend to play many games, though if I wanted to I could always just dual boot the thing...

It's only really a problem if you already owned games that were Windows-only. Otherwise, there are other options, like consoles, etc.

What is your intended use for it anyway?

I know what you mean. I'm only using XP because I needed to for academic reasons. I've come to terms with it and we've established a mutual peace. I don't mangle the system files and it don't bug me every 5 seconds.

I find if you wait about 2-3 years before installing the latest greatest Microsoft fiasco you're much better off. There are patches readily available for the crippling bugs and you can search the internet for easy fixes for annoying elements.

I think Windows peaked around 3.11 and has spiraled downhill ever since.

http://www.break.com/index/how_to_properly_load_vista.html

I find if you wait about 2-3 years before installing the latest greatest Microsoft fiasco you're much better off. There are patches readily available for the crippling bugs and you can search the internet for easy fixes for annoying elements.

I think Windows peaked around 3.11 and has spiraled downhill ever since.

Then I have this great x286 running at a fabulous 35mhz and with 50(!) megabyte hdd for sale. Just $995.99! And for just 5.99 I'll include both Windows 3.11 and MS Flight simulator 2! What are you waiting for? :D

Then I have this great x286 running at a fabulous 35mhz and with 50(!) megabyte hdd for sale. Just $995.99! And for just 5.99 I'll include both Windows 3.11 and MS Flight simulator 2! What are you waiting for? :D

I have fond memories of my old 486 33mhz processor! Well, not exactly fond, it was a Packard Bell, worse tech support has never existed.

Then I have this great x286 running at a fabulous 35mhz and with 50(!) megabyte hdd for sale. Just $995.99! And for just 5.99 I'll include both Windows 3.11 and MS Flight simulator 2! What are you waiting for? :D

I think it's interesting to note that once upon a time such specs were considered adequate for an OS. Nowadays we "need" 128 MB RAM (or whatever it has increased to). Nothing to do with Microsoft deals with hardware companies, of course...

Also, most PC games won't run on Linux (if you have games in mind).That shall change..


i have never considered Linux before.
Enter the RIAA and Vista.

Now I have my mind made, My next PC (1-2 month) is going to be a Dell runing on Linux Ubuntu.

I am guessing many others anti-RIAA poeple like me will give it a shot too.

If Ubuntu/Linux/Dell manages to give/preinstall for free (https://shipit.ubuntu.com/) a decent number of OSs.. the Game companies will have to include a Linux version on the popular DVD-games.

Ubuntu

Aww... you edited it...

the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither)
Not commercially viable? Tell that to Microsoft and Novell who are both selling Suse Linux subscriptions. Or to RedHat, Sun, IBM and all the other corporations who are interested in Linux in some way. Firefox alone is making millions on the "not commercially viable" open source bussiness model.

Not desktop software? ...morons? I've used it on the desktop for years because I think it's the best alternative for almost all tasks except games, it's not as damanding on the hardware and it's free from viruses and drm. I'm happy with Linux and no I'm not a moron. If you are happy with Windows thats great for you, I feel no need to insult you.
(assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).
There is no need to prove anything. We just use different tools and we're both happy with status quo.

Right. So I've upgraded(or downgraded, depending on whom you ask...) my system with vista business. The first thing that strikes me, apart from the icons being twice as big as I would like, is the insane amount of pop-ups from the system. "Do you really wanna run that Daemon Tools, boy?" and the likes. Of course I wanna run that shit, otherwise I wouldn't have klicked on the damn icon!

Yes yes, fine, this is of course a dandy security thing in the UAC module of vista. I still fucking hate it and I wonder if there are any significant security risks with turning it off. Anyone got a clue? Cheers!

http://www.tweak-uac.com/

Not commercially viable? Tell that to Microsoft and Novell who are both selling Suse Linux subscriptions. Or to RedHat, Sun, IBM and all the other corporations who are interested in Linux in some way. Firefox alone is making millions on the "not commercially viable" open source bussiness model.

Not desktop software? ...morons? I've used it on the desktop for years because I think it's the best alternative for almost all tasks except games, it's not as damanding on the hardware and it's free from viruses and drm. I'm happy with Linux and no I'm not a moron. If you are happy with Windows thats great for you, I feel no need to insult you.

There is no need to prove anything. We just use different tools and we're both happy with status quo.
With cedega I even game ... no problems here and they offer the networking tools I need

The rejection of Vista is limited to two camps: one, the Linux morons, whose opinion of commercially viable, desktop software is moot (since Linux is neither), and two, those who are afraid of change. It was exactly the same during the transition from 98SE to XP. Exactly. Same arguments and all. It'll pass within a year and almost everyone criticising Vista now will be using it (assuming they're not already stuck on Linux, professing its greatness while not proving it is so).

Much anger at people who use a different operating system then you ... interesting

Hell i am one of those "Linux Morons" it does not stop me from using vista at work because that is what my users will have. But in the end either with a virtual or with the host OS i have to have a linux machine because of the tools available and the ease to do some tasks

Aww... you edited it...LOL

I called it Mutumbu.. I dont know why.

Could be worse - you could have bought Ad-Aware 2007.

everyone say it with me "Linux"

nice.

everyone say it with me "Linux"

nice.
I'll stick with XP thanks. If I had to change, I would even use Apple before Linux. They are more elitist than Apple and full of incompatibility for the standard user. As hard as even the hardest working Linux distributions try, they are still only as capable as the user can make them, and that is bad for both their independent expansion in market share and the chance that anyone would take "Omg Linux is awesome" as agreeable.

It's only really a problem if you already owned games that were Windows-only. Otherwise, there are other options, like consoles, etc.

What is your intended use for it anyway?
I've mostly used my current computer for school (well, and internets) which includes the obvious (word processing, spreadsheets et c) and some light programming. I wouldn't get a new computer until I have a better idea of what I need to do on a computer for grad school, but generally linux seems like it is a good OS to use.
I didn't really use it (or any other unix sort of things) until this past year and now I kinda don't know how I got by without consoles (well, for doing any useful computing at least... internet message boards don't count)...

Oh, and I suppose I also use my computer for entertainment purposes... music, movies, uploading pictures, chatting et c.

If Microsoft want my computer they can send their corporate ninjas and take it while I'm asleep. But I'm not giving it too them.... I'm also ready for the ninjas.

If Microsoft want my computer they can send their corporate ninjas and take it while I'm asleep. But I'm not giving it too them.... I'm also ready for the ninjas.

*Sends Ninja Pirates*

Yes yes, fine, this is of course a dandy security thing in the UAC module of vista. I still fucking hate it and I wonder if there are any significant security risks with turning it off. Anyone got a clue? Cheers!Someone may have mentioned this already, but if you want to maintain the security features (which may only impress you rarely, but that may be when it counts... like when a program really DOES try doing something without you asking it to, and it turns out to be something ugly), you can get a considerable degree of freedom with the programs you KNOW you like by installing them as an administrator.

I know, I know: you are already running through the administrator account. Doesn't matter, you still need to do this if you want programs to have the kind of access they need to avoid pop-ups.

Step 1: Uninstall any programs that are causing annoying pop-ups when you run them.

Step 2: Download the original install program, or find the CD/DVD. If the latter and it tries to auto-run, nix the auto-run and find the installer manually on the disc.

Step 3: Right-click the installer and select "run as administrator." If the program asks to run after installing, uncheck that checkbox. For best results, restart.

Step 4: Right-click the program file for your newly installed program and select "run as administrator." You only need to do this the first time you run it.


I've tried that with Vista, and I have my pop-ups down to an acceptable minimum. Those first few days were pretty brutal, though.

You can resize the icons independently of the screen resolution in Vista, so them being twice as big as you want is your fault.

Also, you'd be surprised at the number of applications that execute that you did not even want to start.

Finally, you completely missed its biggest flaw: DRM.

Finally, you completely missed its biggest flaw: DRM.Get over it already.

Here (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/hdcp-vista.ars) is a fine summary of why Microsoft had little choice in the matter--unless it doesn't want consumers to be able to play next-gen HD content... and why everyone else is going to have to follow suit--again, unless they want their users to be stuck playing Blu-ray discs in 480p.

Microsoft is just ahead of the curve. Enhanced protections on HD content are coming, they're going to be harder to crack, and anyone not equipped on the usage end with appropriate "DRM" credentials is going to be stuck watching HD at the same resolution as a shitty DVD.

So again: get over it already. Or at the very least, complain to the right place: the content providers--not Microsoft.

Just ordered another 1Gb of RAM for my desktop so I'm ready to put on Vista Ultimate later. I only have two RAM slots in the motherboard though.

Someone may have mentioned this already, but if you want to maintain the security features (which may only impress you rarely, but that may be when it counts... like when a program really DOES try doing something without you asking it to, and it turns out to be something ugly), you can get a considerable degree of freedom with the programs you KNOW you like by installing them as an administrator.

I know, I know: you are already running through the administrator account. Doesn't matter, you still need to do this if you want programs to have the kind of access they need to avoid pop-ups.

Step 1: Uninstall any programs that are causing annoying pop-ups when you run them.

Step 2: Download the original install program, or find the CD/DVD. If the latter and it tries to auto-run, nix the auto-run and find the installer manually on the disc.

Step 3: Right-click the installer and select "run as administrator." If the program asks to run after installing, uncheck that checkbox. For best results, restart.

Step 4: Right-click the program file for your newly installed program and select "run as administrator." You only need to do this the first time you run it.


I've tried that with Vista, and I have my pop-ups down to an acceptable minimum. Those first few days were pretty brutal, though.

Really good to know this, such things I would never figure out myself, being lazy and all :)

I just killed the UAC though, turned that damn aero off (It was giving me headaches!) and now it finally behaves somewhat. I will most certainly need a week or so to get used to the new interface, but I hope against hope, that it will be more user friendly once I fall into the pace...

Really good to know this, such things I would never figure out myself, being lazy and all :)

I just killed the UAC though, turned that damn aero off (It was giving me headaches!) and now it finally behaves somewhat. I will most certainly need a week or so to get used to the new interface, but I hope against hope, that it will be more user friendly once I fall into the pace...
Should go smoothly really have had no issues switching 20 of our office computers over

And we do wierd shit on thoes things

I've heard some really bad things about Vista, and read a bad review or two, but the only user I know (my brother) loves it. Go figure. :p

Get over it already.

Here (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/hdcp-vista.ars) is a fine summary of why Microsoft had little choice in the matter--unless it doesn't want consumers to be able to play next-gen HD content... and why everyone else is going to have to follow suit--again, unless they want their users to be stuck playing Blu-ray discs in 480p.

Microsoft is just ahead of the curve. Enhanced protections on HD content are coming, they're going to be harder to crack, and anyone not equipped on the usage end with appropriate "DRM" credentials is going to be stuck watching HD at the same resolution as a shitty DVD.

So again: get over it already. Or at the very least, complain to the right place: the content providers--not Microsoft.
Yes it's harder to crack but it will still always be cracked as long as they give people both the lock and the key, which they must do for people to be able to watch it. Here (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070415-aacs-cracks-cannot-be-revoked-says-hacker.html) is one example of that HD protection can be cracked.

So others will not have to follow suit with DRM and open source media players can't even if they wanted to since it would be too easy for users to crack something they have the source code to. Linux users who wants to watch their legally purchased disks on the computer will have to use the illegal cracks just like they do today to watch legally purchased DVDs. It's only a problem with legal originals though since ripped versions don't have DRM, it's an upside down world.

While I'm at it, it's also illegal to listen to mp3s on Linux even if the songs are legal because the mp3 format is patented and free open source codecs can't pay patent royalties since they are free.

But if uncrackable DRM would be possible it would hurt Windows the most. Everyone would have to pay for MS Office, Photoshop and all the other Windows programs they are pirating, those who can't afford that (most of the world) would have to switch to Linux. :p

I've heard some really bad things about Vista, and read a bad review or two, but the only user I know (my brother) loves it. Go figure. :p
The only people whining are the tech geek critics and the people who hate Windows anyway.

3 letters DRM

even after they have ironed all the Bugs off..
3 facts will remain

#1 Vista carries the higest concentration of DRM ever.
#2 DRM is meant to help Hollywood and the RIAA.
#3 DRM slows down your Computer.

hmm... i wonder if that's why my computer has suddenly denied the existence of my CD/DVD drive?

Not that I know much about this stuff, but something in the back of my mind seems to think there are parallels between what Microsoft is doing and what Apple did in the lead up to its fall from grace.

Not that I know much about this stuff, but something in the back of my mind seems to think there are parallels between what Microsoft is doing and what Apple did in the lead up to its fall from grace.
Apple's problem is that they refuse to switch away from proprietary hardware which killed a number of early computer manufacturers. They only even recently moved to a standard chip architecture (Intel chips). The only reason Apple is alive is a dedicated, and apparently rich, fanbase. And the iPod.

UAC = United Aerospace Corporation!

UAC had a bad habit of opening portals to demon infected places.
Only people who play Doom would know that.

Err, so turn off UAC.

Okay, I though I'd give Linux another go to see if it's the be-all and end-all of operating systems as some zealots continue to claim. I installed three distributions in succession on fairly standard hardware that works straight out of the box on Windows XP without the need to install additional drivers.

First try:

Freshly formatted system, install Ubuntu 7.04. Despise GNOME, as usual, because it's probably one of the worst interface designs on the planet. Most things seem to work - the graphics, sound etc. It even picks up my wireless network card and installs a driver. Much better than I expected. However, it won't access my network. It freezes at 28% while configuring the card. Oh dear. I then uninstall all wireless drivers and use apt-get to install ndiswrapper and try that. No luck. Uninstall, and try rt2500 (another driver for this chipset). No luck. Still freezes at 28%. It will connect if I disable encryption, but that's of no use to me considering my neighbours steal my wireless otherwise. What happened to Linux being more security conscious than Windows?

Second try:

Freshly formatted system, install Kubuntu 1.6.3, mostly because I wanted to see if KDE has improved any since I last used it. It has, moderately. It's certainly a lot better than GNOME. However, it also freezes at 28%, and none of the above techniques help. I do some reading online and it turns out it's a bug in Ubuntu - WEP encryption will never work with PCI wireless cards with the most current Ubuntu cores. What a waste of time. This is an elementary component of a modern OS that should just WORK.

Third try:

Freshly formatted system, install Fedora Core 7. Doesn't detect my wireless card at all. In fact, it stubbornly refuses no matter what I do. None of the other methods work. At least Ubuntu detected the card.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and it sufficiently fucked up the MBR of the hard drive that Windows XP setup wouldn't boot without some fancy trickery.

I conclude: Linux is still not ready for the desktop. At all.

Despise GNOME, as usual, because it's probably one of the worst interface designs on the planet.
Then use another desktop environment such as KDE, XFCE, Enlightenment or Mezzo.
I do some reading online and it turns out it's a bug in Ubuntu - WEP encryption will never work with PCI wireless cards with the most current Ubuntu cores. What a waste of time. This is an elementary component of a modern OS that should just WORK.
I have to agree that Ubuntu is not ready for your desktop yet. I wouldn't waste any time on Ubuntu either before they release a version that works with my hardware. I use wired network though so the only showstopper you ran into isn't a problem for me, thus it is ready for my desktop.

BTW, you really should replace WEP with the more secure WPA.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and it sufficiently fucked up the MBR of the hard drive that Windows XP setup wouldn't boot without some fancy trickery.
I think the reason for replacing the Windows MBR when installing Linux is that when you have 2 OSes you need a MBR that boots into both OSes but the Windows MBR only boots into Windows.

Which Linux interface is closest to Windows XP?
I've used Gnome (YUCK) and KDE (better) in old distros.

hmm... i wonder if that's why my computer has suddenly denied the existence of my CD/DVD drive?

XP has done that to me before, forget how I fixed it. I think I had to edit the registry.

BTW, you really should replace WEP with the more secure WPA.


The Linux drivers for my card didn't support WPA. Linux will be ready for the desktop when it can match desktop OSes (like Windows) in terms of out of box usability and idiot-proof design. I shouldn't have to root around in a console or through config files just to install a driver.

XP has done that to me before, forget how I fixed it. I think I had to edit the registry.

what's the registry? i've tried everything i can think of (which doesn't amount to much tbh). I thought maybe the System Recovery Options thingy might enable me to fix it, but i can't get into that the way tha manual says (holding F8 when turning the computer on).

what's the registry? i've tried everything i can think of (which doesn't amount to much tbh). I thought maybe the System Recovery Options thingy might enable me to fix it, but i can't get into that the way tha manual says (holding F8 when turning the computer on).

The registry is where Windows keeps most of it's settings and most Windows applications put their settings there too (well, most of them). Basically, if the registry get corrupted - Windows has trouble functioning.

The registry is where Windows keeps most of it's settings and most Windows applications put their settings there too (well, most of them). Basically, if the registry get corrupted - Windows has trouble functioning.

ah ok, i'll have a look in it then. it'll probably all be meaningless to me though :/

ah ok, i'll have a look in it then. it'll probably all be meaningless to me though :/

Start>Run>Regedit

Be warned you can seriously fuck your computer up if you mess around with the wrong things. Regedit should only be used if you have some idea what you're doing.

Start>Run>Regedit

Be warned you can seriously fuck your computer up if you mess around with the wrong things. Regedit should only be used if you have some idea what you're doing.

yeh, i don't know what i'm doing..

all i know is that it says "this device cannot start (Code 10)"

and then the solutions thing just says it can't load the driver software and then offers nothing. stupid computer. as far as the non-behindthescenes stuff is concerned the drive doesn't exist at all. gah!

yeh, i don't know what i'm doing..

all i know is that it says "this device cannot start (Code 10)"

and then the solutions thing just says it can't load the driver software and then offers nothing. stupid computer. as far as the non-behindthescenes stuff is concerned the drive doesn't exist at all. gah!

http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/winxp/t1057386021

Try that, there's a link to a VBScript there that'll apparently fix it. Make sure you scan it for viruses though.

http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/winxp/t1057386021

Try that, there's a link to a VBScript there that'll apparently fix it. Make sure you scan it for viruses though.

ah, nice one :). i'm running vista though i supose it'll be a similar fix?

Which Linux interface is closest to Windows XP?
I've used Gnome (YUCK) and KDE (better) in old distros.
How old? A lot changes in 1 year.

Freespire (http://freespire.org/) is said to be the most Windows like Linux OS, it uses KDE by default.

When it comes to desktop environments XPde (http://www.xpde.com/shots.php) and LXP (http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=173462) looks like Windows XP. IceWM which is much more popular then those 2 can also look like Win XP (http://themes.freshmeat.net/screenshots/38914/41395/) or like Win 98/2k (http://themes.freshmeat.net/screenshots/55565/59702/) with the right themes.

I haven't tried any of those personally.

But even if you make Linux look like Windows you'd still have to remember to do things the Linux way. For example it's still best to install programs with the package manager instead of downloading them from websites. Freespire's CNR seems nice, they claim it only takes 1 click to install a program but I suspect it takes a couple more clicks to start it and find the right program first.

How old? A lot changes in 1 year.

Freespire (http://freespire.org/) is said to be the most Windows like Linux OS, it uses KDE by default.

When it comes to desktop environments XPde (http://www.xpde.com/shots.php) and LXP (http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=173462) looks like Windows XP. IceWM which is much more popular then those 2 can also look like Win XP (http://themes.freshmeat.net/screenshots/38914/41395/) or like Win 98/2k (http://themes.freshmeat.net/screenshots/55565/59702/) with the right themes.

I haven't tried any of those personally.

But even if you make Linux look like Windows you'd still have to remember to do things the Linux way. For example it's still best to install programs with the package manager instead of downloading them from websites. Freespire's CNR seems nice, they claim it only takes 1 click to install a program but I suspect it takes a couple more clicks to start it and find the right program first.

Well, they look at lot better than GNOME ... that's horrible.

Yes it's harder to crack but it will still always be cracked as long as they give people both the lock and the key, which they must do for people to be able to watch it.If you're right, then DRM on Vista shouldn't be much of a problem for all the swashbuckling Vista-haters out there who will have to crack the media to work on Linux anyway... will it?

The point is that there is no reason whatsoever to be upset at Microsoft for this: they are not marketing to the hacking, cracking, trendy eye-patch wearing population that will manage to work things out on their own no matter what the industry throws at them. They are marketing to the average consumer who wants to be able to buy HD media, stick it in their drive, and have it come up on their monitor in a nice resolution somewhere at or above 720p.

Now, if the companies producing the media are not going to allow that unless the end-user has the right DRM certificates and an operating system that knows how to check for them, all of those very nice people are going to be very, very disappointed.

So really, what do you want Microsoft to do? Take a moral stand against DRM that will mean ONLY the media pirates can watch HD? Or make a machine that will work for the average (and I'm guessing much more numerous) consumer?

Honestly, I wish we lived in a world where that kind of moral stand would make sense, but then again I was never very crazy about capitalism. As it is, though there is much I find detestable about Microsoft I am often even more concerned about critics who seem to go into convulsions at the very mention of Windows. It's just not rational, and it's not helping your cause to completely misunderstand the forces that are really at work here.

Microsoft was, it seems, a bit ahead of the game here--but then they would have to be, because they probably won't release another operating system for another five years, and then they'd be behind. There is every reason to believe that Apple will soon follow suit, if they want to have any hope of maintaining what has become a very respectable market share.

You are, of course, right about one thing: open-source software will have to continue to rely on pirated media and software hacks, which is precisely why open-source software will never become truly mainstream... at least, not until the problem is dealt with at its source: the content providers, not the operating system. But, in the corporate capitalist climate in which we live, that would be tantamount to a social revolution.

I do some reading online and it turns out it's a bug in Ubuntu - WEP encryption will never work with PCI wireless cards with the most current Ubuntu cores.
I have a PCI card and I use WEP encryption and Ubuntu.

3 letters DRM

even after they have ironed all the Bugs off..
3 facts will remain

#1 Vista carries the higest concentration of DRM ever.
#2 DRM is meant to help Hollywood and the RIAA.
#3 DRM slows down your Computer.

Which is, of course, why I can watch pirated movies and listen to pirated music just fine with Vista Business?

Also you can change the icon sizes and such with the properties menu, same as you ever could with Windows 95 onwards.

Indeed you can. It took me days to find that menu hidden behind layers of "user friendliness" though.

I have a PCI card and I use WEP encryption and Ubuntu.

It seems to be specific to my brand of chipset.

Ugh, remind me to buy a Mac when I need a new computer so I can avoid this shit.

Mac is doing all the same shit. Especially iTunes.

Which is, of course, why I can watch pirated movies and listen to pirated music just fine with Vista Business?You can, but your IP is already listed on a server with a trace of every search you requested with your keyboard.

The people running Microsoft are not fools (that is why Bill Gates is numero uno).. The huge DRM arsenal is embedded inside the Vista code.. It cannot be taken away.. and it will be progressively turned on once Vista reachs the critical 90% share >>

>> Once XP is phased-out.
I fully expect Microsoft to try to phase-out XP faster than ever before.

You can, but your IP is already listed on a server with a trace of every search you requested with your keyboard.

The people running Microsoft are not fools (that is why Bill Gates is numero uno).. The huge DRM arsenal is embedded inside the Vista code.. It cannot be taken away.. and it will be progressively turned on once Vista reachs the critical 90% share >>

>> Once XP is phased out.
I fully expect Microsoft to try to phase our XP faster than ever before.

I actually burst out laughing at this. You are ridiculously misinformed. You're ridiculous! Hahahaha!

It seems to be specific to my brand of chipset.

Let me guess it's VIA chipset ...

Let me guess it's VIA chipset ...

No, it's ralink.

I actually burst out laughing at this. You are ridiculously misinformed. You're ridiculous! Hahahaha!OK how about this

Vista's DRM does not slow down you computer, because Vista has No DRM..

..and if it had, Microsoft has planned to be progressively turned off.. besides Microsoft went to all the trouble embedding that DRM code so you can turn it off whenever you want.
happy now?

OK how about this


happy now?

How about actually correcting the errors I laughed at rather than those you've presented there. For example, claiming that Microsoft has tracked your IP via Vista if you download pirated material because of this magical DRM. What a ridiculously stupid statement derived from ignorance. The DRM is ONLY used for high definition disks. ONLY. NOTHING else is affected by it, and even then, it doesn't track you, it doesn't identify you, it doesn't send any data to Microsoft - it degrades the quality of the signal.

Microsoft are not Skynet. Vista is not going to become evil once it has 90% adoption. To claim otherwise is paranoia, ignorance, stupidity and - as you've shown in the past - an irrational tendency to believe conspiracy theories simply because they're conspiracy theories.

No, it's ralink.

Next time, just get an nVidia based mobo eh? :D

The DRM is ONLY used for HD disks. ONLY. NOTHING else is affected by it, and even then, it doesn't track you, it doesn't identify you, it doesn't send any data to Microsoft - it degrades the quality of the signal.you are entitled to your opinion. Buy Vista. its made for you. :D

good luck. ;)

I just love the people who insist, simultaneously, that Bill Gates can't market an OS that won't crash every ten minutes... yet somehow he is also the mastermind behind a nefarious conspiracy to take over the world.

I just love the people who insist, simultaneously, that Bill Gates can't market an OS that won't crash every ten minutes... yet somehow he is also the mastermind behind a nefarious conspiracy to take over the world.

Hey, for an OS that crashes every 10 minutes, he got the world to mostly use his OS didn't it? Maybe there's a link :p