If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On 1/18/2019 8:09 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Char Jackson wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:24:53 -0500, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote: "Keith Nuttle" wrote in message ... The same people who said the Model T was obsolete and built the Model A Ford No, its more like the same people who complained about Windows 7 that were holding the opinion XP was better. The cycle repeats with the same peoples' complaints. In many ways, XP was better than 7, 7 was better than 8, and 8 was better than 10 (in any of its forms). So yes, the cycle repeats, but only MS can break out of the rut. They'd have to produce an OS that people generally regard as better than what came before it, which is much easier said than done. Well, they *did* break the pattern going from Vista (which you left out) to 7! Or are you implying that Vista was better than 7!? :-) [Well, unless you were an early adopter, Vista wasn't all that bad. The Security/Permissions model was quite *different*, but - at least IMO - not bad/worse_than_XP. Vista served me well for nearly eight years. YMMV/YMWV.] I don't know why any of this is in a Win10 newsgroup. From a technical standpoint, Vista implemented fundamental processes such as the elimination of app-controlled memory locations that were specified but never enforced in XP. That broke a number of apps that their creators thought, as many do to this day, they could force MS' hand by not being compliant. Win7 is, technically, just Vista 2.1, or whatever the next version would have been if it hadn't been given such bad press. The only difference I saw is that MS *removed* control functions that were available in Vista, essentially dumbing it down. Technically, Win8 and Win8.1 were a complete departure from earlier versions of Windows. Although many people were "stunned" by the default UI, if they had looked at their settings they would have found the option to default to the familiar desktop, mainly leaving the obvious change to the Windows menu button. What was really different about Win8.x was that folks that were used to managing their own updates via service packs and the like (including myself) learned that it would no longer be practical to do that. Sometimes, the hard way. It bricked one of my computers when I used 3rd party apps to circumvent the forced updates. It's now running Linux. Win10 integrates the two separate UIs of Win8 into a single UI, but the underlying concept of updates being a "feature" of the OS and out of users' hands is even stronger. One thing that MS got right that wasn't right in Win8.1 is that updates are no longer forced onto computers that haven't been screwed with by the user. All of my Win10 computers are still on 1803, presumably because there is something "reported home" by those systems' hardware or firmware that tell MS to leave them as-is. That works for me. -- best regards, Neil |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:01:33 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:07:23 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message 20190117090848.50d76286@milospc, Johnny writes: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 22:37:21 +0800 "Mr. Man-wai Chang" wrote: Can a class-action suit be filed to US Court to force Micro$oft to extend its support for Windows 7? I doubt it; I can't see how any company can be obliged to continue supporting an obsolete product, unless they were foolish enough to ever promise to do so. I would say it's like expecting Ford to continue to support the Model T, but I have a feeling they do. snip One might wonder what's obsolete about Windows 7, and who gets to make the determination in the first place? Here is Merriam-Webster's definition of "obsolete": 1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful an obsolete word b : of a kind or style no longer current : old-fashioned an obsolete technology farming methods that are now obsolete As far as I'm concerned, it's not quite obsolete, but it's clearly getting there. It's obsolescent. Here is Merriam-Webster's definition of "obsolescent": going out of use : becoming obsolete Again, clearly Windows 7 is going out of use. It certainly doesn't seem obsolete to me. In fact, it seems to be much more functional and stable than 10, although that opinion isn't universal. I don't agree. In my experience, both Windows 7 and 10 are almost completely stable. I don't remember any Windows 10 crashes here. Also in my experience, Windows 10 is just as functional as Windows 7. Anything that can be done in Windows 7 can also be done in Window 10. Add third-party programs like Start 10 (which I use and like very much) and Directory Opus (which I use and also like very much) and it can be done just as easily (or more easily, in the case of Directory Opus) as in Windows 7. One other comment: what is perceived as Windows 10 lack of stability by many people often has nothing to do with stability. Crashes can be caused by many things: hardware problems, malware infection, user errors, bad software, etc. And if a crash occurs on the computer of someone who thinks Windows 10 is a bad choice, he usually doesn't know what caused it, and typically blames it on Windows 10. I'll take that one step further: roll the clock back and change all instances of "Windows 10" in the above paragraph to "the latest version of Windows," and it remains true. There are almost always many people who think the latest version of Windows, whatever it is, is terrible, and blame all their problems on it. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:39:38 -0700
Ken Blake wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:01:33 -0600, Char Jackson wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:07:23 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message 20190117090848.50d76286@milospc, Johnny writes: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 22:37:21 +0800 "Mr. Man-wai Chang" wrote: Can a class-action suit be filed to US Court to force Micro$oft to extend its support for Windows 7? I doubt it; I can't see how any company can be obliged to continue supporting an obsolete product, unless they were foolish enough to ever promise to do so. I would say it's like expecting Ford to continue to support the Model T, but I have a feeling they do. snip One might wonder what's obsolete about Windows 7, and who gets to make the determination in the first place? Here is Merriam-Webster's definition of "obsolete": 1 a : no longer in use or no longer useful an obsolete word b : of a kind or style no longer current : old-fashioned an obsolete technology farming methods that are now obsolete As far as I'm concerned, it's not quite obsolete, but it's clearly getting there. It's obsolescent. Here is Merriam-Webster's definition of "obsolescent": going out of use : becoming obsolete Again, clearly Windows 7 is going out of use. It certainly doesn't seem obsolete to me. In fact, it seems to be much more functional and stable than 10, although that opinion isn't universal. I don't agree. In my experience, both Windows 7 and 10 are almost completely stable. I don't remember any Windows 10 crashes here. Also in my experience, Windows 10 is just as functional as Windows 7. Anything that can be done in Windows 7 can also be done in Window 10. Add third-party programs like Start 10 (which I use and like very much) and Directory Opus (which I use and also like very much) and it can be done just as easily (or more easily, in the case of Directory Opus) as in Windows 7. One other comment: what is perceived as Windows 10 lack of stability by many people often has nothing to do with stability. Crashes can be caused by many things: hardware problems, malware infection, user errors, bad software, etc. And if a crash occurs on the computer of someone who thinks Windows 10 is a bad choice, he usually doesn't know what caused it, and typically blames it on Windows 10. I'll take that one step further: roll the clock back and change all instances of "Windows 10" in the above paragraph to "the latest version of Windows," and it remains true. There are almost always many people who think the latest version of Windows, whatever it is, is terrible, and blame all their problems on it. I never thought any of them were terrible until Windows 8. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:39:38 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:01:33 -0600, Char Jackson wrote: One might wonder what's obsolete about Windows 7, and who gets to make the determination in the first place? It certainly doesn't seem obsolete to me. In fact, it seems to be much more functional and stable than 10, although that opinion isn't universal. I don't agree. In my experience, both Windows 7 and 10 are almost completely stable. I don't remember any Windows 10 crashes here. I wasn't referring to crashes. I was referring to having a stable computing platform that can be counted on to be ready to go when the user is ready to go. Clearly, Windows 10 misses that mark by a country mile. There's a segment of the computing public for which Windows 10 is just fine. Within that segment, you have people who just don't know any better, or people who use their computer for non-work activities who, at the most, are only inconvenienced by the weaknesses of Windows 10. I might say that they don't really care, or they've otherwise somehow come to grips with the idea that this is just how it is and how it's going to be. Kudos to that group, because they've made their lives a bit easier. But there's another segment of the computing public who need more platform stability, there's that word again, than Windows 10 can deliver. I can't say for sure, but I assume there will come a time, perhaps when I'm in retirement, where the current behavior of Windows 10 would put me into the first segment above, but at the moment, still being in the workforce and needing a computer to do my work, I'm very clearly in the second segment, where Windows 10 falls very short. Can MS get it to where it needs to be? I think so, but it's been about a decade now since they've tried to deliver an OS that does what I need, rather than what they (MS) want for it. Their goals, and my goals, are slipping further apart rather than getting closer. Also in my experience, Windows 10 is just as functional as Windows 7. Anything that can be done in Windows 7 can also be done in Window 10. Some days that's true. Other days it's not. From that perspective, things are much worse now than they were before Windows 10 came onto the scene. When you're using a computer for work, there are lots of times when you need it right now, not in 10 minutes or an hour, when it decides it's ready to be available. You're retired, so maybe none of it really matters to you. If the computer isn't ready to work, you can get up and get a cup of coffee. You can go for a walk or run an errand. I, and others like me who use a computer for work, don't have that luxury. Fortunately, we still have options. For me, that's Windows 7 and a highly customized Windows 8.1. Highly customized because it literally took me two years to get Windows 8.1 tamed to where I could start to depend on it. I could do it faster now, of course, but back then it was new and people were in the midst of discovering and remediating the various weaknesses and shortcomings. Now we're in the same situation with Windows 10, but so far we're finding that the most egregious behaviors have no easy remedies. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
"Char Jackson" wrote in message
... I wasn't referring to crashes. I was referring to having a stable computing platform that can be counted on to be ready to go when the user is ready to go. Clearly, Windows 10 misses that mark by a country mile. I can't say for sure, but I assume there will come a time, perhaps when I'm in retirement, where the current behavior of Windows 10 would put me into the first segment above, but at the moment, still being in the workforce and needing a computer to do my work, I'm very clearly in the second segment, where Windows 10 falls very short. Can MS get it to where it needs to be? I think so, but it's been about a decade now since they've tried to deliver an OS that does what I need, rather than what they (MS) want for it. Their goals, and my goals, are slipping further apart rather than getting closer. Also in my experience, Windows 10 is just as functional as Windows 7. Anything that can be done in Windows 7 can also be done in Window 10. Some days that's true. Other days it's not. From that perspective, things are much worse now than they were before Windows 10 came onto the scene. When you're using a computer for work, there are lots of times when you need it right now, not in 10 minutes or an hour, when it decides it's ready to be available. You're retired, so maybe none of it really matters to you. If the computer isn't ready to work, you can get up and get a cup of coffee. You can go for a walk or run an errand. I, and others like me who use a computer for work, don't have that luxury. Fortunately, we still have options. For me, that's Windows 7 and a highly customized Windows 8.1. Highly customized because it literally took me two years to get Windows 8.1 tamed to where I could start to depend on it. I could do it faster now, of course, but back then it was new and people were in the midst of discovering and remediating the various weaknesses and shortcomings. Now we're in the same situation with Windows 10, but so far we're finding that the most egregious behaviors have no easy remedies. My Windows 7 PC is staying Win 7 forever. I haven't got the patience to have to disentangle all the little things that will stop working after the upgrade (always assuming that the PC actually boots in the first place after upgrade) and will have to be removed, reinstalled and re-customised. Then there'll be all the software that is no longer compatible or which gets forcibly removed with no ability to download and install again (Windows Live Mail, for example). In other words, what sits on top of the operating system should require as little intervention as possible, even if the foundations (the OS) are removed and a new version installed. If I go for Win 10, it will be on a brand new PC that I can run side-by-side with the Win 7 PC, while I'm setting up the Win 10 PC to match the Win 7 one, without the Win 7 stopping working until the Win 10 problems have been addressed. Too many upgrades of software (not specifically the OS) stop a valued add-on from working. I loathe the new UI of Firefox and prefer the older versions that can be customised with Classic Theme Restorer that (you've guessed it) is incompatible with new Firefox. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 13:14:40 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote: On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:39:38 -0700, Ken Blake wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:01:33 -0600, Char Jackson wrote: One might wonder what's obsolete about Windows 7, and who gets to make the determination in the first place? It certainly doesn't seem obsolete to me. In fact, it seems to be much more functional and stable than 10, although that opinion isn't universal. I don't agree. In my experience, both Windows 7 and 10 are almost completely stable. I don't remember any Windows 10 crashes here. I wasn't referring to crashes. I was referring to having a stable computing platform that can be counted on to be ready to go when the user is ready to go. Clearly, Windows 10 misses that mark by a country mile. I wouldn't call that "stability," but if that's what you meant, I'll respond to it. In my experience, not only does it not miss the mark by a country mile, it doesn't miss it by a country inch. It doesn't miss it all. On both Windows 10 computers here, and all the others I've helped people on, it's always ready. There's a segment of the computing public for which Windows 10 is just fine. Within that segment, you have people who just don't know any better, or people who use their computer for non-work activities who, at the most, are only inconvenienced by the weaknesses of Windows 10. I might say that they don't really care, or they've otherwise somehow come to grips with the idea that this is just how it is and how it's going to be. Kudos to that group, because they've made their lives a bit easier. But there's another segment of the computing public who need more platform stability, there's that word again, than Windows 10 can deliver. I can't say for sure, but I assume there will come a time, perhaps when I'm in retirement, where the current behavior of Windows 10 would put me into the first segment above, but at the moment, still being in the workforce and needing a computer to do my work, I'm very clearly in the second segment, where Windows 10 falls very short. Can MS get it to where it needs to be? I think so, but it's been about a decade now since they've tried to deliver an OS that does what I need, rather than what they (MS) want for it. Their goals, and my goals, are slipping further apart rather than getting closer. Also in my experience, Windows 10 is just as functional as Windows 7. Anything that can be done in Windows 7 can also be done in Window 10. Some days that's true. Other days it's not. From that perspective, things are much worse now than they were before Windows 10 came onto the scene. When you're using a computer for work, there are lots of times when you need it right now, not in 10 minutes or an hour, when it decides it's ready to be available. You're retired, so maybe none of it really matters to you. If the computer isn't ready to work, you can get up and get a cup of coffee. You can go for a walk or run an errand. I, and others like me who use a computer for work, don't have that luxury. Retired or not, it matters to me just as much as it does to you. But as I said, my experience is very different from yours. Fortunately, we still have options. For me, that's Windows 7 and a highly customized Windows 8.1. Highly customized because it literally took me two years to get Windows 8.1 tamed to where I could start to depend on it. I could do it faster now, of course, but back then it was new and people were in the midst of discovering and remediating the various weaknesses and shortcomings. Now we're in the same situation with Windows 10, but so far we're finding that the most egregious behaviors have no easy remedies. You and I don't disagree on many things, but this is one where we clearly do. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
"Bill in Co" surly_curmudgeon@earthlink on Thu, 17 Jan 2019 22:52:43
-0700 typed in alt.windows7.general the following: Char Jackson wrote: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:24:53 -0500, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote: "Keith Nuttle" wrote in message ... The same people who said the Model T was obsolete and built the Model A Ford No, its more like the same people who complained about Windows 7 that were holding the opinion XP was better. The cycle repeats with the same peoples' complaints. In many ways, XP was better than 7, 7 was better than 8, and 8 was better than 10 (in any of its forms). So yes, the cycle repeats, but only MS can break out of the rut. They'd have to produce an OS that people generally regard as better than what came before it, which is much easier said than done. Well, they did so at least in the following transitions: Win 3.1 to Win 95 to Win 98SE to Win XP. Each one was better, IMHO. Then I think things went South, since Windows 7 (at least to me) seems much more restrictive in what I can and cannot do(is too nanny-state-ish). Like with all the Ownership and Permissions stuff. And the confusing Junction Points. More obfuscations. And almost needing Classic Shell, for a more sensibly intuitive and logical interface. Some of the "problem" is that "sensible", "intuitive" and "logical" can be _very_ very subjective. As in "Which key do you press when it says 'Press any key"?" Enter or spacebar? And I am guessing Windows 10 retains all of that - and more. What I am afraid of, is Windows 10+N will restrict my options to only MS products. -- pyotr filipivich Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
Char Jackson on Thu, 17 Jan 2019 22:53:52 -0600
typed in alt.windows7.general the following: On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:24:53 -0500, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote: "Keith Nuttle" wrote in message ... The same people who said the Model T was obsolete and built the Model A Ford No, its more like the same people who complained about Windows 7 that were holding the opinion XP was better. The cycle repeats with the same peoples' complaints. In many ways, XP was better than 7, 7 was better than 8, and 8 was better than 10 (in any of its forms). So yes, the cycle repeats, but only MS can break out of the rut. They'd have to produce an OS that people generally regard as better than what came before it, which is much easier said than done. The "issue" is installed user base. I suspect that a lot of the griping about "the old way was better" is due to Microsoft having "fixed" /"enhanced" the experience in ways which broke the routines _users_ had gotten used to doing. E.G., Switching from the command-line to the Graphical User Interface "broke" the routine of typing "simple" commands to accomplish things. Dir, Touch, grep, ncd, etc. I really do not care what the OS is doing, as long as it does not "get in my way". I.e., breaking the routines I had. E.G. where is the icon for "show desktop", or "wordpad"? Yeah, yeah, I know "It's better". So is the Dvorak keyboard. -- pyotr filipivich Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Java Jive wrote:
to Win XP. Each one was better, IMHO. Not IME, 2000 was way better than XP. It could still be argued that NT & 2000 have been the only truly *Professional* releases - in other words comparatively free from bloat, eye candy clutter, and useless gizmos, with GUIs that could, admittedly with some trouble, be made to 'just work' in a way that has become increasingly more difficult with every new version since, and is now almost impossible. I liked W2K as well. Simple and clean. Then I think things went South, since Windows 7 (at least to me) seems much more restrictive in what I can and cannot do(is too nanny-state-ish). Like with all the Ownership and Permissions stuff. And the confusing Junction Points. More obfuscations. And almost needing Classic Shell, for a more sensibly intuitive and logical interface. And I am guessing Windows 10 retains all of that - and more. Yes, the cluttered child's toy GUIs increasingly took over, in a way that fills me with visceral disgust whenever I encounter a new installation and am filled with the depressing and long-winded task of removing all the crap clutter to make it look even tolerably professional. Yes, I agree. Argh. It's not just Windows too. -- Quote of the Week: "Trivial hurts, tiny human accidents," said Firenze, as his hooves thudded over the mossy floor. "These are of no more significance than the scurryings of ants to the wide universe, and are unaffected by planetary movements." --Harry Potter book Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / / /\ /\ \ http://antfarm.ma.cx. Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail. | |o o| | \ _ / ( ) |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
In article , Wolf K
wrote: In The Design of Everyday Things, Donald Norman points out what's obvious once you see it: electrical/electronic devices have no obvious, intuitive methods of operation. It's all dials, knobs, buttons, keys, and switches. Sure, a lever switch is obviously flipped on or off, but when there are two or more, they have to be labelled (and usually shape- and colour-coded for safety's sake), or you don't know which one to flip when. excellent book. So we must rely on de facto standards, and on habits. That's why even minor changes in the GUI cause such conniptions. no, it's because most products do not have particularly good user interfaces, and that's being overly generous. make a change and it sucks in different ways. a good ui is *hard*, which is why ui/ux designers get paid big bucks and why a lot of companies don't bother. IMO, everybody involved in the design fo electrical and electronic devices should read Norman's book. Several times, if necessary. without question, and not just electronics. it's always entertaining to watch people smash into norman doors... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY96hTb8WgI |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
nospam on Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:25:19 -0500
typed in alt.windows7.general the following: In article , Wolf K wrote: In The Design of Everyday Things, Donald Norman points out what's obvious once you see it: electrical/electronic devices have no obvious, intuitive methods of operation. It's all dials, knobs, buttons, keys, and switches. Sure, a lever switch is obviously flipped on or off, but when there are two or more, they have to be labelled (and usually shape- and colour-coded for safety's sake), or you don't know which one to flip when. excellent book. So we must rely on de facto standards, and on habits. That's why even minor changes in the GUI cause such conniptions. no, it's because most products do not have particularly good user interfaces, and that's being overly generous. make a change and it sucks in different ways. a good ui is *hard*, which is why ui/ux designers get paid big bucks and why a lot of companies don't bother. "User Friendly" is programmer hard. it's always entertaining to watch people smash into norman doors... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY96hTb8WgI Oh yeah. -- pyotr filipivich Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing? |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
In article , pyotr
filipivich wrote: So we must rely on de facto standards, and on habits. That's why even minor changes in the GUI cause such conniptions. no, it's because most products do not have particularly good user interfaces, and that's being overly generous. make a change and it sucks in different ways. a good ui is *hard*, which is why ui/ux designers get paid big bucks and why a lot of companies don't bother. "User Friendly" is programmer hard. very much so. lazy programmers = bad user interfaces (and bad apps for that matter). |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 17:48:56 -0500, silverslimer wrote:
In reality, I don't believe that there are any real good guys in politics but I have a lot more faith in Trump than I do in the Democrats. So far, they've been very sneaky and sleazy. Wrong newsgroup. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 22:53:52 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
In many ways, XP was better than 7 Really? I remember when I got my Windows 7 laptop, how much easier Windows 7 was to use than XP. What are some of the things you consider to be steps backward in Win 7? -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Lengthen the life of Windows 7 using the legal system
"Stan Brown" wrote
| Really? I remember when I got my Windows 7 laptop, how much easier | Windows 7 was to use than XP. What are some of the things you | consider to be steps backward in Win 7? | Copy a folder to a location where it already exists. XP: "This will overwrite any files of the same name. Proceed?" Me: "Yes. Thanks." ----- Win7: "Here are 3 choices of what to do for this file being copied... Replace? Make a new copy? Skip it? ...And what about this file....and this file...." Me: "OK. Just apply the same answer to the rest of them." Win7: "Done. Now what about this file... and this file... and this file..." ---- Now multiply that idiocy by 100: "You need permission to do what you just did." "You just inserted a USB stick. The formatting is faulty. We recommend you reformat it." (It's perfectly fine.) "You just inserted a USB stick. Do you want to scan it?" (On a system with no AV! To this day I haven't noticed what it wants to scan for. I just close nonsense messages as quickly as possible.) "No, of course there's no up arrow in folders. Why do you want to go back?" "Wha? We've just given you a choice of 15 "My" folders to browse in. What else do you need? Oooooo-kay. Here's C drive. Happy now? Desktop? No. Why would you want to browse for a file on the desktop. Wait. You don't have permission for any of this anyway. Plase give yourself permission for the operation you don't have permission for." On and on and on... XP: "Your wish is my command." Me: "Thank you, XP. Stay in 5th gear. I'm going to want to be doing some quick zipping around for awhile." XP: "No probs, buddy boy. Put your seat belt on!" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|