Stupid Microsoft

dumb question: Is that a microsoft site?
 
Bob Noel said:
dumb question: Is that a microsoft site?
Click to expand...
Two considerations...
  1. The copyrighted "Windows" trademark at the top-left. Ya think the great MS would allow free use of their trademark?
  2. The Microsoft copyright line at the bottom along with terms of use link.
Yep, it's their's.
 
Check the file associations. Another media player (can you say Real, Quicktime?) probably tried to grab .wmv file handling.

Save the file to disk and open with->Windows Media Player [x] Always use this.
 
It's more about every other application that runs on your machine. The vendors STILL believe that their application is the only one you will ever use/need. Why else would you have to reboot your PC after installing a new app? And microsoft won't fix it unless you really really want it.
Quicktime and REAL muck with the filetypes. Once done, getting them back is a real bear. You can go to options for the app and reset it, but does that really work?
Oh, and I have an issue on vista with the system default browser. Even FOLLOWING microsoft's instructions, it still doesn't work like it should.
Computers.... about the best you can do is fill them with cement and use them as a door stop! $^%&^%&^$##
 
windows_7.png


Ouch! :rofl:
 
This sort of BS is what I hated about the Apple in the 90's (and their advertising lies and poor memory management).

If you got a TIFF file that wasn't made by the program on your Mac, you couldn't open it.

The advertising issue- they said Macs were much faster than PCs. We did a head-to-head in the lab- a new Mac vs a 1 year old PC- the PC did everything in 1/2 the time.

The memory issue- draw a large structure in ChemDraw- it hangs because the program ran out of memory. The user had to allocate more memory to the application. MS-DOS/ Windows 3.0 did it seamlessly.
 
No, no, no, you were just doing it wrong. Or, more likely, you just did not need to do it at all.

It was not Apple's fault.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
The memory issue- draw a large structure in ChemDraw- it hangs because the program ran out of memory. The user had to allocate more memory to the application. MS-DOS/ Windows 3.0 did it seamlessly.
Click to expand...
That's from well before OS X. Classic Mac OS required the user to manually manage the application's memory.

OS X is what Apple should have gone to when they switched to the PowerPC. If they had, this wouldn't even be a contest.
 
Bob Noel said:
dumb question: Is that a microsoft site?
Click to expand...

--------- snip ---------

From: whois.tucows.com:43

Registrant:
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
US

Domain name: WINDOWS.COM

Administrative Contact:
Administrator, Domain domains@microsoft.com
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
US
+1.4258828080
Technical Contact:
Hostmaster, MSN msnhst@microsoft.com
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
US
+1.4258828080

--------- snip ------------

Yeah, another app could have stolen the association on the PC; but regardless of whatever other apps are installed on the computer, that doesn't affect the accuracy of information on the Web site. You'd think one of Microsoft's own Web sites would know what a .wmv file is and what app one is "supposed to" use to open it.

Truly stupefying.

-Rich
 
Cap'n Jack said:
This sort of BS is what I hated about the Apple in the 90's (and their advertising lies and poor memory management).

If you got a TIFF file that wasn't made by the program on your Mac, you couldn't open it.

The advertising issue- they said Macs were much faster than PCs. We did a head-to-head in the lab- a new Mac vs a 1 year old PC- the PC did everything in 1/2 the time.

The memory issue- draw a large structure in ChemDraw- it hangs because the program ran out of memory. The user had to allocate more memory to the application. MS-DOS/ Windows 3.0 did it seamlessly.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I know you mean. I really hated when the 92K floppies on my CP/M machine ran of space to save the file.

Try using a Mac with OS X. I know for a fact the underlying Unix does a better job f memory management because I monitor it. It's not my Mac where I have to take my hands off of the keyboard while I wait.

But on the plus side, I use the 3-5 minute it takes for web page to load at work to go over here and visit the real world.

Oh. I haven't seen it lately but at least a year ago some Intel Macs ran Windows faster than many OEM Windows PCs.
 
> The advertising issue- they said Macs were much faster than PCs. We did a
> head-to-head in the lab- a new Mac vs a 1 year old PC- the PC did everything in
> 1/2 the time.

What mac? what PC? what task?
 
486 Dell vs whatever Mac was current a year after the 486 came out.
Programs were:
Excel macros we used in the lab
Import Natural Products Database into FileMaker pro from text
Sieve of Eratosthenes written in C++ using a Borland compiler and the only licensed compiler for the Mac (they licensed the run time library).
 
Cap'n Jack said:
486 Dell vs whatever Mac was current a year after the 486 came out.
Click to expand...

I dunno exactly when that was, but I think it was a while before the PowerPC machines came out, and I don't remember much if any advertising on Apple's part that they were "faster" back then. It was more like "You can get things done faster because it's easier to use" rather than a focus on faster processing.

The "Faster" back then was the Mac IIfx. Apple pronounced it "two eff eks" but the rest of us knew it stood for Too ****ing Xpensive. ($10,000. Keyboard not included. Monitor not included. Video card not included. :eek:) Despite being a 40MHz 68030-based machine, it was "Faster" than a 50MHz 68040 (fastest Moto 68K series processor available at the time) because it included new technologies like DMA, offloading of I/O tasks from the main CPU, etc. Back then, Apple focused their advertising on ease of use rather than speed, because Windows was still in its barely-adequate stage.
 
and I had a IIfx gathering dust in the garage for years before it went to the trash heap ...
 
jmaynard said:
OS X is what Apple should have gone to when they switched to the PowerPC. If they had, this wouldn't even be a contest.
Click to expand...

You underestimate Microsoft's marketing and overall business savvy - And you forget Apple's horrific record of relations with big business. :eek:

For OS X to have come out with the PowerPC Macs, it would have needed to arrive six years earlier. What stage was NextStep in 1991?

Also, both the PowerPC transition and the OS X transition (and of course, the Intel transition) were amazingly smooth. Make them both happen at the same time, and they might have made it just as easy to switch to Wintel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top