[vipejc]

Hey, guys. I don't get much time to post here, but when I do, I like to make an impact. So today we're going to discuss a very passionate topic with me: Microsoft and all its failures. Microsoft has always been so-so, but now they're way below average. I've been right about these guys as soon as Vista was announced, and now I'm so confident in my beliefs, I'm sharing them with you.

I never even bothered researching or installing Vista because as soon as I heard Microsoft rewrote most of the code, I knew it was a disaster waiting to happen. And then it came. People learned what I knew. Microsoft felt the hurt. Why do you think they ditched Vista so quickly and moved on to Windows 7? Simple: because they knew Vista was a loser and they'd lose a huge chunk of their customers if they kept with it.

I knew ever since 2004 that Windows XP was the best OS in the world and absolutely knew it was going to last this long. And as much as Microsoft doesn't want to hear it, Windows XP will live forever, at least in this house. Can't reveal secrets, but I've gone to great pains to guarantee that.

As soon as the Xbox 360 was released in 2005, I knew Microsoft would lose billions trying to mitigate - they never actually fixed - all the problems. See, the console was rushed to stores, uses cheaper parts, and just wasn't tested or designed well at all. That's why it freezes and red rings all the time. I even wrote one of my Microsoft contacts a highly technical letter explaining exactly what's wrong with the Xbox 360. His response was thank you for this info. And of course, he never put it into practice. One fact is Microsoft tried to save a few pennies and designed their own CPU for the 360, but of course it overheated and then they ran back to AMD and Intel. I could've told them that. LOL

Windows 7 is nothing more than XP on eye-candy (Aero Glass UI) with a few super lame new features. Yeah, as if I'm paying a penny for that when my custom XP looks just as good.

So if you aren't seeing the Microsoft pattern, let me make it clear. Ever since Bill Gates left and Vista came, Microsoft has been going downhill. Vista SUCKS. The Xbox 360 SUCKS. The new Windows logo looks like a 5 year old made it, and, you guessed it, SUCKS. Windows 8 will be even worse than Vista. It'll be the death of Microsoft. Old school computer guys like me HATE it. It's so ugly looking and weird to use. Seriously, who with half a brain uses a computer on a tablet or wants to touch the screen and get fingerprints on it, and then have to clean it all the time? Stupid! Keyboard and mouse for life. Just read the laundry list of options and features Windows 8 removed right here in the Windows 8 forum. If you thought Vista or 7 was light, 8 is a bulimic. Just confirmed everything I knew as soon as I heard Windows 8 is coming not even three years after Windows 7. Basically, 8 is a bad scientific experiment aimed at mobile computer users.

Oh, and just so you know, Microsoft is a computer Nazi now. I also knew this was coming when so many people were staying with XP. Basically, XP users, Microsoft is deleting many non-security downloads. You'll get your precious but pretty useless security updates until April 2014, but after that no more XP anything from Microsoft. Expect a new Windows OS every 1 to 2 years moving forward and expect pressured, forced upgrades. Why do you think the last version of Office won't work in Windows 8? So you're forced to purchase a newer version.

I'm so sick and tired of this mediocre money machine. And it's about to die. The truth is WE DON'T NEED MICROSOFT LIKE WE USED TO. There's always Linux. Third parties ALWAYS do anything Microsoft does 1000% better. When you think Microsoft, you think okay quality, terrible support, incompetent ownership, and extremely lazy employees.

Let's take a look at classic Microsoft in detail...
Every Windows OS is way behind the times in features, innovation, compatibility, and user friendliness. You always need a third party to get stuff done. Ninety-eight percent of the value of the Windows OS comes from third parties.

The Service Packs are a complete joke. A service pack is supposed to be an exciting time for an OS owner and be jam-packed with improved, new, and useful features, all updates to date, and extend format compatibility to date. But oh no, not Microsoft. A Windows Service Pack is a trinket with 3-4 super lame new features and maybe some updates. I would gladly pay $30 a year for unlimited new XP Service Packs that actually innovated the best OS.

Microsoft can't keep up with technology. All they have are outrageous ideas that are unstable and sound cool on paper.

Here's just a few reasons why Microsoft is awful:
Windows XP comes with NT Backup to back up system state and files, but guess what - even in 2001 when DVDs were popular, the native program doesn't support backing up to DVD, only tape and some other useless storage options. LOL Are you kidding me? This should've been added to Service Pack 1. Or even better, it should've been designed right from the start. Or best, it should've never been designed and Microsoft should've known it needed to include a great drive-image program with the OS, especially for somebody who preaches the importance of backing up your data every chance they get. LOL

Windows Media Player 11 doesn't natively support MPEG-4. You can hack it, but you shouldn't have to. Again, something that should've been added to Service Pack 3.

Service Pack 2 was so-so, but hardly anything got done there, too. Just another wasted opportunity in Redmond, Washington.

Windows comes with a stripped down movie maker called Windows Movie Maker. The good news is you can make your own transitions, effects, titles, and credits (if you know XML), and add to the very little Microsoft gives you, making this thing awesome. I have, like, 3,000 total transitions, titles, effects, and credits. I just wish such an awesome thing didn't crash so much. The stock version with no add-ons. Microsoft didn't even test it right. And how are newer versions for Vista and 7 of Movie Maker even more bare-bones than my 2.1 version? So stupid.

MS Paint is TOO simple. It can't even rotate an image in arbitrary values. I'm not asking for Photoshop features, but this is ridiculously bad.

I could go on forever about what Microsoft does wrong, so I'll leave it there.

Microsoft is so unprofessional and disorganized, it's pathetic. They don't even know their own product. Microsoft could've gave XP users IE9, but they want to force upgrades, so they didn't. Same goes for SATA support in XP. Microsoft is almost dead. They're just not smart enough to stay alive in the tech world much longer. And this new iron-fist ruling is going to crumble their castle. Just watch as my bold predictions become reality, again.

All we want is XP for life. It's all we'll ever need. It does it all. And again, I would happily pay $10 once a year for an awesome Service Pack that actually felt new and modern. As it stands, I feel Microsoft is extremely lazy and unqualified to be in the computer industry, and I will not purchase another Microsoft product as long as I live.

Oh, and M$, you might want to fix your completely broken download-validation process. I see a lot of unhappy users all over the Web.

When will they learn? How about never. People do NOT want to spend 10 years learning a new worse OS. People do NOT want to scavenger hunt the whole Web for answers on how to do this or that with their OS - that you're supposed to teach them in the manual. Stop changing the names and locations of features and files. Get it right the first time and leave it alone. Make the names easy to understand. Just use some common-sense, already!

This post has been edited by vipejc: 24 October 2012 - 03:13 PM

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

EPIC

[Win2k3EE]

vipejc - you said it! I couldn't agree with you more.
M$

[JorgeA]

Hear, hear!

I totally agree with most of what you say, especially regarding Windows 8. Although I can't vouch for XP (I jumped from 98 to Vista) as it's the major Windows version that I've used the least.

Sure wouldn't mind it if they offered a "maintenance subscription" where you could pay X dollars a year for them to keep issuing tweaks and security updates indefinitely, that would be a great idea. It wouldn't even have to lower their profits, if they priced it correctly (say, $40/year past end of mainstream or extended support).

But then, being a great idea, it's out of the question for the current MS management.

--JorgeA

[vipejc]

JorgeA, on 21 October 2012 - 12:33 AM, said:

Hear, hear!

I totally agree with most of what you say, especially regarding Windows 8. Although I can't vouch for XP (I jumped from 98 to Vista) as it's the major Windows version that I've used the least.

Sure wouldn't mind it if they offered a "maintenance subscription" where you could pay X dollars a year for them to keep issuing tweaks and security updates indefinitely, that would be a great idea. It wouldn't even have to lower their profits, if they priced it correctly (say, $40/year past end of mainstream or extended support).

But then, being a great idea, it's out of the question for the current MS management.

--JorgeA

Thanks, guys. I appreciate the support. If all Windows users followed my lead, Windows would be pretty much perfect. I don't want to hate Microsoft. They're the lifeblood of computers. I want to love them, but they make it impossible. I know how business works. I want them to make a fortune, but it has to be fair, especially in these tough times. No more x10 price markups on products; x3 is more than fair. They need to understand a consumer is not a corporation and probably can't afford $200 for a new OS every few years. Are you listening, Adobe and your $700 Photoshop? Software should be free with optional paid yearly expansion packs. Not new versions that are incompatible with older file types or file-type versions. It's just all wrong. They say technology makes our lives easier. I say it makes them much harder and the learning curve is much too steep. People ask me all the time how can somebody know so much about technology if they don't like it. And I tell them I tolerate it because it's my life.

This post has been edited by vipejc: 21 October 2012 - 10:16 PM

[vipejc]

JorgeA, on 21 October 2012 - 12:33 AM, said:

Hear, hear!

I totally agree with most of what you say, especially regarding Windows 8. Although I can't vouch for XP (I jumped from 98 to Vista) as it's the major Windows version that I've used the least.

Sure wouldn't mind it if they offered a "maintenance subscription" where you could pay X dollars a year for them to keep issuing tweaks and security updates indefinitely, that would be a great idea. It wouldn't even have to lower their profits, if they priced it correctly (say, $40/year past end of mainstream or extended support).

But then, being a great idea, it's out of the question for the current MS management.

--JorgeA

Heck, Jorge, I'd pay $40 a year for a real XP Service Pack that corrects all the OS shortcomings.

This post has been edited by vipejc: 21 October 2012 - 10:13 PM

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

I'm going to downgrade from Win 7 and put WinXP back on my system. I have one computer with 4gb of ram dual core etc.... Win 7 is still slow.

[Ponch]

Honestly...I disagree with most your post. In fact there are so much contradictions I could also say that you disagree yourself.

[vipejc]

Ponch, on 21 October 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

Honestly...I disagree with most your post. In fact there are so much contradictions I could also say that you disagree yourself.

No contradictions here. Just raw supported facts and a totally brilliant but hypothetical business model for Windows. Well, enjoy Windows 8. Maybe they'll include 4D glasses and make you feel like you're upside down. LMFAO

[vipejc]

PROBLEMCHYLD, on 21 October 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

I'm going to downgrade from Win 7 and put WinXP back on my system. I have one computer with 4gb of ram dual core etc.... Win 7 is still slow.

LOL Can I take a screenshot of this and send it to Microsoft?

[vipejc]

Xbox 720 games will cost $99.95 and the console will overheat in 10 minutes. It has a general life expectancy of 7 days. Maybe 10 if you cry while saying "I love you and spent $800. You can't die on me." LOL

[Kelsenellenelvian]

Quote

The Service Packs are a complete joke. A service pack is supposed to be an exciting time for an OS owner and be jam-packed with improved, new, and useful features, all updates to date, and extend format compatibility to date. But oh no, not Microsoft. A Windows Service Pack is a trinket with 3-4 super lame new features and maybe some updates. I would gladly pay $10 a year for unlimited new XP Service Packs that actually innovated the best OS.

SERIOUSLY???

Service packs (With the exception of XP sp2) have NEVER been about that... Why would they do that? It is a SERVICE PACK not a FEATURE PACK....

Service packs, by definition, are service packs, If they did what you say they are supposed to then there would be no need for new OS's...

You seem almost as full of yourself as the new heads of MS.

p.s. there is a EDIT button. what you are doing is spamming.....

[vipejc]

Kelsenellenelvian, on 21 October 2012 - 08:05 AM, said:

Quote

The Service Packs are a complete joke. A service pack is supposed to be an exciting time for an OS owner and be jam-packed with improved, new, and useful features, all updates to date, and extend format compatibility to date. But oh no, not Microsoft. A Windows Service Pack is a trinket with 3-4 super lame new features and maybe some updates. I would gladly pay $10 a year for unlimited new XP Service Packs that actually innovated the best OS.

SERIOUSLY???

Service packs (With the exception of XP sp2) have NEVER been about that... Why would they do that? It is a SERVICE PACK not a FEATURE PACK....

Quote

Oh, I don't know...maybe because it's the right thing to do, it makes customers feel appreciated, and it makes computer life a lot easier and better. What was I thinking!

Service packs, by definition, are service packs, If they did what you say they are supposed to then there would be no need for new OS's...

Quote

And fixing and innovating isn't a service? That's such a general term. That's because there is no need for a new OS.

You seem almost as full of yourself as the new heads of MS.

Quote

Sorry I sounded big headed. I wasn't trying. Just being me and saying what I feel.

p.s. there is a EDIT button. what you are doing is spamming.....

I know there's an Edit button. I only use it all the time. Spamming? No spamming is distributing UNWANTED info. The people here really seem to want to hear this.

What do you mean the new M$ heads are full of themselves?

This post has been edited by vipejc: 21 October 2012 - 08:54 AM

[Kelsenellenelvian]

2+ posts directly in a row is also spamming...

There was NO need for that (Other than to build your post count)

If they made service packs feature packs they would go out of business quicker. You paid $99 - $199 for your XP home. and you have used it for a LOOOONG time. What else has MS gotten from you for the support they have given it? They would make little to no money that way...

Plus without MAJOR changes (Things that would denote a whole new OS essentially) there is no way the programming could keep up with hardware. Just look at the max ram and cores each OS could handle when they came out. Please by all means use your XP home on a new era multi core comp:

Maximum:
1 Physical CPU (Multi-Core + Hyper-threading supported)
4 GB of RAM
4 GB of Virtual Memory

4 GB FAT16 Partition
32 GB FAT32 Partition (Formatted during Setup)
2 TB FAT32 Partition
2 TB NTFS Partition (Basic Volume)

2 GB FAT16 File Size
4 GB FAT32 File Size
2 TB NTFS File Size (Basic Volume)

* > 137 GB Hard Disks require SP1 or higher (48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS Required)

XP home cannot address even the full 4gigs ram...

See nearly any HONEST Windows 8 thread and article to figure out how the new heads of MS are full of themselves.

The vast majority of people that have tried Win8 or even looked into it have expressed major concerns about allot of problems.

The heads of MS in their infinite wisdom and since they clearly know what we want and need have decided all of this sh*t...

I.e. the major couple:

Smart screen filter (Not easy to disable) sends user statistics to MS (Read spy ware) as to what you download and install.

NO DVD\BRD optical drive support without spending extra dough.

Extremely difficult to use without touch screens out of the box.

Here is a huge list of MS (We know better so you don't need this) UN-features in Win8:

http://www.msfn.org/...d-in-windows-8/

This post has been edited by Kelsenellenelvian: 21 October 2012 - 09:44 AM

[tomasz86]

Kelsenellenelvian, on 21 October 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

XP home cannot properly use more than 2 cores and cannot address even the full 4gigs ram...

XP Home can actually support up to 32 cores

[Kelsenellenelvian]

OK that could very well be.

But in a seriousness would a 32 core\4gig system even really run?

[tomasz86]

Kelsenellenelvian, on 21 October 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

OK that could very well be.

But in a seriousness would a 32 core\4gig system even really run?

I don't think that anyone needs so many cores at home

But 4/8 cores are pretty common nowadays and there's really no reason not to use XP Home on such a system.

[vipejc]

Kelsenellenelvian, on 21 October 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

2+ posts directly in a row is also spamming...

There was NO need for that (Other than to build your post count)

If they made service packs feature packs they would go out of business quicker. You paid $99 - $199 for your XP home. and you have used it for a LOOOONG time. What else has MS gotten from you for the support they have given it? They would make little to no money that way...

Plus without MAJOR changes (Things that would denote a whole new OS essentially) there is no way the programming could keep up with hardware. Just look at the max ram and cores each OS could handle when they came out. Please by all means use your XP home on a new era multi core comp:

Maximum:
1 Physical CPU (Multi-Core + Hyper-threading supported)
4 GB of RAM
4 GB of Virtual Memory

4 GB FAT16 Partition
32 GB FAT32 Partition (Formatted during Setup)
2 TB FAT32 Partition
2 TB NTFS Partition (Basic Volume)

2 GB FAT16 File Size
4 GB FAT32 File Size
2 TB NTFS File Size (Basic Volume)

* > 137 GB Hard Disks require SP1 or higher (48-bit LBA-compatible BIOS Required)

XP home cannot properly use more than 2 cores and cannot address even the full 4gigs ram...

See nearly any HONEST Windows 8 thread and article to figure out how the new heads of MS are full of themselves.

The vast majority of people that have tried Win8 or even looked into it have expressed major concerns about allot of problems.

The heads of MS in their infinite wisdom and since they clearly know what we want and need have decided all of this sh*t...

I.e. the major couple:

Smart screen filter (Not easy to disable) sends user statistics to MS (Read spy ware) as to what you download and install.

NO DVD\BRD optical drive support without spending extra dough.

Extremely difficult to use without touch screens out of the box.

Here is a huge list of MS (We know better so you don't need this) UN-features in Win8:

http://www.msfn.org/...d-in-windows-8/

I couldn't care less about my post count. This isn't some geek popularity contest. But sorry, I pledge to post once a day? You obviously haven't read my earlier posts in this thread, because the whole point of this thread was to express how to build a Microsoft the whole world enjoys, not put them out of business. THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU ABOUT MICROSOFT AND WINDOWS 8. Again, you're not listening. I NEVER want new hardware, I know all my future hardware limitations, and I am 100% happy with my AMD Athlon XP 3000+ Barton single core CPU. So happy, I have a backup in the closet. I'll say it once more. The world is happy with XP. I know all about 32-bit OS limitations and none of it hinders me. A 64-bit OS is just a gimmick.

This post has been edited by vipejc: 21 October 2012 - 10:01 AM

[vipejc]

tomasz86, on 21 October 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Kelsenellenelvian, on 21 October 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

OK that could very well be.

But in a seriousness would a 32 core\4gig system even really run?

I don't think that anyone needs so many cores at home

But 4/8 cores are pretty common nowadays and there's really no reason not to use XP Home on such a system.

LOL Kelse, you're funny. You don't even know your facts, but you're making technical references.

The truth is XP Home supports 1 CPU with as many cores as the motherboard supports, and XP Pro supports up to 2 CPUs with as many cores as the motherboard supports.

Tomas, I use XP Home with a single core CPU. A home user never needs more than 2 cores. It's all a gimmick. All multi-core means is the cores work together to get work done a little faster, but since most people use one, maybe two, apps at a time, it's never a problem.

This post has been edited by vipejc: 21 October 2012 - 10:22 PM

[huja]

I agree with you on XP. Probably the best MS OS. It would be nice if we could keep XP alive even after 2014. I tried, for example to install XP on my AMD laptop... and I got bluescreen after bluescreen. Cant find any compatible AMD Mobility drivers.

You said: "XP will live forever, at least in this house. Can't reveal secrets, but I've gone to great pains to guarantee that".

My I ask you how? What about drivers and software that drop support for XP? How are you going to install XP on a new computer, lets say year 2017?