Moderator: General Mods
You're not the only company. Remember, even the US DOT has banned Vista and IE7.badinsults wrote:The company that I am working for right now even refuses to upgrade to IE7!
Not working even after 100 refreshesfranpa wrote:I've scored a constant 174KB/s which is nice since I'm on a 1.5mbit connection.
EDIT: http://blog.hznet.nl/2009/01/10/how-to- ... dows-7-key
1) if your taken to a search engine (windows live search etc.) re-paste the link into the URL box, don't F5.
2) it works with FF 3 and I have a key ^^"
3) takes lots of tries.
4) example of the page you get the key on http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h133/ ... led-36.png
Indeed,getting a legit/valid key is harder than winning the lotteryYeah. 64 MB ought to be enough for everybody, at least for file managing.DEFIANT wrote:Even XP is bloated compared to Windows 98
It's more of a Permissions bug than the Start Menu.franpa wrote:Vista has WORSE Start Menu bugs then XP! With UAC disabled and an Administrator account, can you delete a folder in the Start Menu that has sub folders? no. Does it instead display some permissions error and create a COPY of what your deleting in the Recycle Bin? Yes -.- (I am the only user installed on the PC)
Sometimes the 2nd bug occurs for no reason o_o as in, also occurs for folders that DON'T contain sub folders.
Grandma: "Start" what? My car?FitzRoy wrote:Welcome Center is the epitomy of bloat. Oh, great, a useless popup telling me I can do things every time I start windows. You'd think after the mockery of the Office paperclip, they'd have learned to stfu. Is start>settings really that obscure of a location for grandma to find?
Real bug and MS hasn't done anything about it yet, but there is a solution.FitzRoy wrote:Retarded bug #24: When I load files from a program, windows explorer fails to remember that I've disabled per-folder view settings. When I use explorer by itself, it's fine.
It's easy to forget to not erase a file extension and blindly click through the warning prompt.FitzRoy wrote:Hiding extensions by default never made sense, another lame attempt to try to make things "simpler." You cannot differentiate files based on images alone, I think the average person is smart enough to understand file extensions.
The start menu isn't so bad.FitzRoy wrote:Now I hear they're trying to remove desktop icons in Windows 7 by default to make things simpler. *sigh* These people have no idea what they're doing. Each new Windows iteration will increase the amount of time it will take me to set it up with a grown man's configuration.
It's to early for 7 to look different, if you look past some of the current changes. Also Vista did enough changes, why go further?DEFIANT wrote:I tried this when it was leaked a month ago....still looks and feels like vista. I'm not impressed. Why is it, when people think of progress, I have to relearn a system from scratch....that's progress?? I don't think so.
So you want another XP based on XP? (XP [5.1] was a fixed up version of 2000 [5.0])DEFIANT wrote:They should of just fixed XP and built upon a proven operating system. As far as I'm concerned, XP will be my final stop.
Vista got the some kind of software and I don't think 7 will have it any different from those devs.DEFIANT wrote:Even XP is bloated compared to Windows 98, but I always Nlite my XP to remove all the crap I don't need. That way I get XP my way without the crap and MORE secure that the default install.
I though Windows 7 was supposed to be Modular.DEFIANT wrote:One day Microsoft will listen to the people and make Windows modular and stop changing the UI every time they feel the need to make more money.
arstechnica.com wrote:Still having trouble getting a key? The following are the 10 the system is handing out.
32bit:
QXV7B-K78W2-QGPR6-9FWH9-KGMM7
6JKV2-QPB8H-RQ893-FW7TM-PBJ73
GG4MQ-MGK72-HVXFW-KHCRF-KW6KY
TQ32R-WFBDM-GFHD2-QGVMH-3P9GC
4HJRK-X6Q28-HWRFY-WDYHJ-K8HDH
64bit:
RFFTV-J6K7W-MHBQJ-XYMMJ-Q8DCH
482XP-6J9WR-4JXT3-VBPP6-FQF4M
JYDV8-H8VXG-74RPT-6BJPB-X42V4
D9RHV-JG8XC-C77H2-3YF6D-RYRJ9
7XRCQ-RPY28-YY9P8-R6HD8-84GH3
Oh, c'mon, if someone's dumb enough to miss the only button on the screen, she certainly won't know how to close the Welcome Center or load a file from a program menu.Truth Unknown wrote:Grandma: "Start" what? My car?
So make it a double warning prompt. Or at the very least change the default to make them viewable, but not modifiable parts of the name.Truth Unknown wrote:It's easy to forget to not erase a file extension and blindly click through the warning prompt.
The only programs I use the start menu navigation for are programs I don't use enough to put on my desktop. Why? Because it's slower than dbl clicking on an icon by like a factor of 5. Besides, what the hell is the desktop space there for? It's not a wall for the wallpaper.Truth Unknown wrote:The start menu isn't so bad.
DEFIANT wrote:I tried this when it was leaked a month ago....still looks and feels like vista. I'm not impressed. Why is it, when people think of progress, I have to relearn a system from scratch....that's progress?? I don't think so.
When they start moving things around and call it easier, I have my doubts. Between 98 and XP the learning curve was a gradual slope. XP to Vista is a f*cking mountain. I don't like it and I don't think it's easier.Truth Unknown wrote:It's to early for 7 to look different, if you look past some of the current changes. Also Vista did enough changes, why go further?
DEFIANT wrote:They should of just fixed XP and built upon a proven operating system. As far as I'm concerned, XP will be my final stop.
Not another XP but keep the same style file system and UI. Hell, even the server version or XP (Win2003 NT 5.2.3790) has some fixes that could of went into the home and pro versions. (Ram Limit) (Stability)Truth Unknown wrote:So you want another XP based on XP? (XP [5.1] was a fixed up version of 2000 [5.0])
DEFIANT wrote:Even XP is bloated compared to Windows 98, but I always Nlite my XP to remove all the crap I don't need. That way I get XP my way without the crap and MORE secure that the default install.
Huh? I'm not sure I follow you. From what I've seen and played with, Windows 7 is Vista with a new name a few things added like the taskbar/launchbar. I've heard that UAC has been toned down as to not ask you every single time about common day things. But all in all the changes that were made to Vista's UI are still apparent in 7. That's enough for me to give it a thumbs down. There isn't a way to go back to the classic look of windows UI (like 95,98,2000,XP). WTH?Truth Unknown wrote:Vista got the some kind of software and I don't think 7 will have it any different from those devs.
DEFIANT wrote:One day Microsoft will listen to the people and make Windows modular and stop changing the UI every time they feel the need to make more money.
By modular I mean the ability to remove components I necessarily don't want or need. Such as the backup system (system restore) that's also present in XP. I have no need for it (I use Acronis True Image). Yes I understand it can be turned off but I prefer just to remove it all together. There's also Internet Explorer, I use Firefox, Paint, I use Paint.net, all the preloaded drivers, all I need are the ones for my current system (wich I slipstream into my install CD/DVD anyway), The built in firewall, I use another, The built in Windows Defender. All that CRAP needs to have a built in way to remove it without the need of third party support to do so.Truth Unknown wrote:I though Windows 7 was supposed to be Modular.
It's not a matter of preference to point out something that makes no sense. Why do columns cut off filenames by default? Why doesn't Windows show extensions in a way that still prevents accidental deletion? Why do actions, unchecked selections, and window spawns that don't require further user action all look the same according to Windows GUI standards? It's maddeningly nonsensical, it creates annoyances on a grand scale. I've wasted hours trying to overcome Vista's new security measures on a single user PC that I own. Even after disabling UAC, I was being blocked from making changes to files on my XP configured external drive. Fortunately, I'm more savvy than these poor people, my solution wasn't even on this page. The confusion and helplessness is palatable:sweener2001 wrote: it's good that you've got convictions, but you've got to stop posting in a "this is the only way it should be and any other way is gay" tone. people are different, and from what i've noticed, you fall into a small minority.
It is the first beta, why would they update features now, that are most likely to be there in the final version when there trying to show off whats new in Windows 7?DEFIANT wrote:DEFIANT wrote:There isn't a way to go back to the classic look of windows UI (like 95,98,2000,XP). WTH?
Like, open Control Panel and choose an item, the window blanks then the items information fades in from left to right.
If it's not a alpha/beta/test build for Windows 7, don't expect this kind of stuff (firewalls, AV, etc.) to work... seriouslyfranpa wrote:Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 does NOT work with Windows 7 build 7000... it causes Blue Screens, randomly wont load for some Windows Sessions, and can't be removed unless it IS loaded -.-
You have to get in and disable the feature that prevents unauthorized system changes... then (reboot if it BSODs after this) use the Trend Micro Support Tool found in the Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 installation folder and uninstall it.
It uses the Windows Installer so it can't be uninstalled from Safe Mode :/
it is when it makes sense to a lot of other peopleFitzRoy wrote: It's not a matter of preference to point out something that makes no sense. Why do columns cut off filenames by default? Why doesn't Windows show extensions in a way that still prevents accidental deletion? Why do actions, unchecked selections, and window spawns that don't require further user action all look the same according to Windows GUI standards? It's maddeningly nonsensical, it creates annoyances on a grand scale. I've wasted hours trying to overcome Vista's new security measures on a single user PC that I own. Even after disabling UAC, I was being blocked from making changes to files on my XP configured external drive. Fortunately, I'm more savvy than these poor people, my solution wasn't even on this page. The confusion and helplessness is palatable:
http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesper/ ... drive.aspx
I am aware that programs that work very closely with the O/S such as Anti Virus software will not work well with beta's etc. of the O/S.Deathlike2 wrote:If it's not a alpha/beta/test build for Windows 7, don't expect this kind of stuff (firewalls, AV, etc.) to work... seriouslyfranpa wrote:Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 does NOT work with Windows 7 build 7000... it causes Blue Screens, randomly wont load for some Windows Sessions, and can't be removed unless it IS loaded -.-
You have to get in and disable the feature that prevents unauthorized system changes... then (reboot if it BSODs after this) use the Trend Micro Support Tool found in the Trend Micro Internet Security 2009 installation folder and uninstall it.
It uses the Windows Installer so it can't be uninstalled from Safe Mode :/
