Joe , you wrote : I spent ...setting up a Gateway 295C Tablet PC, with 2.2GHz processor, 2GB of RAM, 128GB graphics memory and 250GB hard drive. The system had an acceptable Windows Experience Index of 3.8 (the scale goes to 5.9). "

Joe, you forget to mention to us that you are using Windows Vista from the evil you have been bashing so far.

Perhaps , you purposedly don't want to mention to us that you are using Vista.

Or you start to feel guilty condemning Vista that resided in your 250GB Harddisk

Joe , why not you try to use Mozilla and Linux ?

You can stop using Vista, no one on this planet will force you to use Vista

I also want to open the debate to Microsoft Watch readers :

Joe likes Vista so much that he decided to have a Gateway with 2GB RAM /128MB Graphics and 250GB HDD to run his "evil" stuff.

Joe , you are really a hypocrit, a liar ..

Joe, since your last bashing on Vista, we thought you have totally made up your mind and switch to either Mac or Linux ?

Let us know how Leopard treated you so far ?

IE 7 is b0rk3n!

I had a strange problem with a brand new Vista laptop. I couldn't open Google.com. It would not accept Google as the default home page it kept redirecting to Live Search. I don't remember what I did to fix it, but I eventually got it to work. It was strange.

Joe
Why only a 128mb graphic Card ?? When 256mb is the usual and has been for quite some time !!

I hate Microsoft, I take every opportunity to bash them .

But I am still using Vista

I am just another Joe

I would imagine this was done by Gateway. Many of our Dell systems ship preconfigured with Google everything as the default although many programs such as Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash etc. have checkboxes you need to uncheck or else good will take over from there as well. I pretty much have gotten to the point where I treat Google's Desktop Search as Malware because it installs from almost all the freeware out there these days and hinders performance on the machines and in some cases crashes them because the index file gets to big.

whoever is responsible for this, Google or Dell, the behavior is un-acceptable. Joe, you are running a setup program, i assume with an account that has administrative previldges and that program modifies the registry. It is not an IE7 security issue. You have the right to modify the registry, since you are running it with an account that has the priviledge. Encrypting the value wounldn't do much in the long run either.

To Eder and Neil, regarding the 128MB graphics:

This computer is more typical, actually a little better, of what OEMs are shipping at retail. The 128MB graphics is dedicated, with up to 768MB shared with system memory. Yesterday I stopped to look at a high-end HP PC with big, honking monitor. Windows Experience Index: 2.4. Most systems now are 64MB or 128MB graphics shared to 256MB or 384MB, which is shameful. That's an OEM problem, not Microsoft doing.

Joe

The later it gets the later is gets...

Vista should have had all the advantages developed from Microsoft's XML development over a number of years. But they didn't do the right thing when they had the chance. That's management's fault. Engineering knew what they were doing so to blame Vista's delays and screwups on technological or production problems is downright dishonest.

The "technological" problems Microsoft had were in licensing and I'm not talking about Microsoft licensing to the users. Microsoft should have secured a license to use the technology that would allow MSFT to process XML across http instead of waiting for so long to settle.

They settled with Eolas in order to bring out Silverlight 1.0. If they don't' settle with VCSY, you won't be seeing a Silverlight 1.1 and the longer they delay the more public will be their revelation to the market and industry and customers that Microsoft screwed the entire client base by trying to screw VCSY.

Do what you will with that information. Some here want you to only do some reading then accept their explanation of the situation. The fact that posters here don't want you to take this kind of information to an expert and ask questions for your own knowledge and peace of mind should be an alarm signal to you as to what you should believe.

http://blogs.cnet.com/8301-13506_1-9806255-17.html
October 29, 2007 7:44 AM PDT
Posted by Don Reisinger
CNET (exerpts)
Microsoft Vista is nothing more than a public beta of an operating system that should have been held back until the major issues with the operating system were addressed.

For the first time, PC manufacturers are staging a miniature revolt and Microsoft has seemed nonchalant about the entire ordeal. Of course, the reason is quite simple: it has too much capital invested in Vista and an outright cancellation or public apology would be too much for Microsoft to swallow. So, instead of doing the right thing, we're left with a shoddy operating system.

...Microsoft has started a stealth PR game that slowly gets us thinking about the follow-up to Vista -- Windows 7. First, the company stated that it would not release features from the OS, but subsequent to the release of Vista, details emerged about a pervasive typing line and parallel computing. Even better, the company demonstrated a stripped down variation of the new Windows 7 kernel (called MinWin) a few weeks ago. Is this all an accident? Not a chance. The company is doing everything it can to take the attention off Vista and its blunders and has already begun the marketing campaign on the next OS. Who would have thought it would have begun so soon?

(MSFT) has too much capital invested in Vista and an outright cancellation or public apology would be too much for Microsoft to swallow. So, instead of doing the right thing, we're left with a shoddy operating system.

To make matters worse, Microsoft is in the process of releasing Service Pack 3 for XP that, for all intents and purposes, adds the nice features from Vista to XP. Upon doing so, why would anyone need to upgrade to Vista? If you have an operating system that works and it now includes the good elements of Vista, what's the impetus to buy the Vista upgrade?

(more at URL)

Microsoft had the opportunity to settle with VCSY and employ next generation technology in all their products at much lower cost to reputation and capability. Money is not the issue for MSFT as they have plenty of money. But management didn't move and instead delayed Vista, Longhorn, WinFS, Viridian, Silverlight, Titan... the list goes on and on and is currently being delayed as well.

Now MSFT will settle at a higher cost where it hurts most for Microsoftees - their industry reputation.

E-mails containing malicious PDF files have been putting computers at risk since Friday, Finnish security software firm F-Secure said on Saturday.

http://www.news.com/Report-PDF-files-used-to-attack-computers/2100-7349_3-6215656.html?tag=nefd.top
-----------------------------------------------------
And of course, which system is the malware designed to attack? (windows)

VCSY NEWS!(Microsoft settlement-soon-imo)

NOW Solutions Awarded Judgment for $3.1 Million Against Ross Systems, Inc.Last update: 10/29/2007 1:06:00 PMFORT WORTH, Texas, Oct 29, 2007 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- NOW Solutions, Inc. (Now Solutions), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (VCSY)(), announced today that it has been awarded a judgment in the New York Supreme Court in the action of Ross Systems, Inc. (Ross) vs. Now Solutions in the amount of $3,151,215.52 which includes interest and attorney fees. "Both Now Solutions and VCSY are extremely pleased to have prevailed against Ross in this trial and to have been awarded this judgment," stated Richard Wade. "We are continuing to refocus our efforts as we roll out Now Solutions' Service-as-a-Software HRMS suite and VCSY's Managed Baseline Solution products." This release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. With the exception of historical information contained herein, the matters discussed in this press release involve risk and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statement.

Vista Sales Rate Fell Last Quarter

MS is not directly mentioning Vista demand while they brag about how much money they made last quarter, because sales fell.

http://www.electronista.com/articles/07/10/26/vista.sales.rate.slowing/

Quote: "The Redmond, Washington-based company shipped approximately 28 million copies of Vista in the latest quarter ended September, or 9.3 million copies per month. Though the Windows developer pointed to 27 percent growth in business licenses and noted that many home users were buying the more lucrative Vista Home Premium or Ultimate editions, the rate represents a decline from the 10 million per month reported early in summer."
--------------------------------------------------
Sell less Vi$ta, and yet make more? Which should tell us they are bleeding the public. I would have thought Joe Willcox would have reported these figures, but it seems he is cozy with MS these days, as most of the advertising comes from MS on this site now.

Leopard might have been delayed because of interoperability.

-So if people are buying Leopard today without the type of interoperability that VCSY can provide how will they get it in the future?

(Interoperability can come in the form of a middleware solution not embedded in the actual application. That is really the most convenient and easiest way to do it and is precisely why 7076521 is so useful. It allows an architect to take a legacy application and fit if for any purpose including virtualization (actually virtualization is the first step provided by 521 as middleware as the proprietary software is virtualized to a transaction enabled XML).

-Download as a SP and for free?

(That can be. Yes.)

-Charged an additional fee as an add-on to current users?

(correct. That middleware download and pay may be from another party outside of Apple. Thus Windows and Leopard could be virtualized by someone outside of the two companies thus providing a fully expanded way to compete with both operating systems.

-Will consumers have to buy another (upgraded)version of Leopard?

(Don't know. Nothing's been said by Apple as far as I know.)

-How easy will Apple be able to integrate VCSY type of interoperability into Leopard?

(Middleware lays over the outside of the application so there is no other integration beyond the middleware being made aware and conversant with the OS specifications and parameters. In Leopard's case the middleware simply uses the ZFS information for determining the transactional state of the OS [Apple ZFS is read only - thus limiting actuation of the OS whereas Sun's bidirectional ZFS would allow the middleware to "run" the OS.].)

-If consumers have to buy another version or even pay for an upgrade most wont just like Vista. That's why I thought Apple delayed it so they can sell the complete package. Now that is out what's next?

(The value of middleware like the XML Enabler Agent and all other agent capabilities that may be built is that the legacy application doesn't have to be touched or retooled. All future modernization and optimization can be done using the old platform as a form of kernel to the new capabilities. THAT is what is so threatening in 521 and 744.)

If this is an easy answer and I missed it then I've read too many posts because it's all a big blur about now.
I'm just about to put all this reading to bed and just wait it out.

(I also commented weeks ago this is all going to become a very large blur so yes it is advisable to simply sit back from here and just nod to yourself when you see things that look like VCSY tech. I would say IBM and Adobe and Verizon appear to be VCSY's vanguard and we simply need to wait out the PRs.)

And we know VCSY/NOW Solutions has been commercial in SaaS since 2006 as this article points out about Verizon/NOW Solutions in January 2007:

http://www.thewhir.com/marketwatch/011607_Verizon_Powers_NOW_Solutions.cfm

whereas Microsoft has been struggling to convince the industry they're active in SaaS:

Microsoft?s Latest SaaS Message is a Step Backwards
posted on: October 04, 2007

Microsoft (MSFT) said September 30 that it had introduced ?Online? services and ?Live? services to ?deliver connected computing options for people and businesses.? I found the announcement one of the most confusing I ever received from a software supplier, from the odd Sunday timing, to the stark bifurcation the announcement made between ?Live? and ?Online,? to the sentence after the explanation of why a hard difference between Live and Online was important, which used both terms (?Office Live Workspace is among the first entries in the new wave of online services?). If Online services are something different than Live services, which is Workspace?

(more at URL)

So, reader. Why do YOU think Microsoft is so cautious about how they describe their "SaaS" efforts? Are the lawyers holding the engineers and marketeers back? HA Or is Microsoft moving ahead confidently into the SaaS market of tomorrow?

What do YOU see when you read?

It is pretty hard to avoid Googlejacking. I have long suspected them of doing evil in this regard even above and beyond the opt-out installation of Google Toolbar with pretty much all kinds of software.

Companies such as Dell make ca $45 per computer on preinstalled crapware which reduces the performance, stability and maintainability of your system.

I don't like what Google are doing in these spaces and check monthly to see that they have not infected my computer with software which does me no good and which is problematic from a privacy point of view.

My IE 6 on XP was also redirected to use Google and no longer has the ability to select other providers - registry key for Search URL was wiped clean other than Google being there.
Tom

Hmm, I dont use IE much at all, in fact my install is 99.9% default settings. Iv changed the home page. I just checked, and I get the same behavior! I run XP with all the latest patches, and use FireFox as my main browser...

I have a Gateway desktop computer. When I first got it, find search provider worked fine. A short time ago I decided to add another search provider and had the same outcome that you did with the Google search page. After reading your article I did a search in the registry for the FindProvidersURL and found the Google URL there as you did. I changed it to the Microsoft URL and it works fine now. Incidentally, I had installed Mozilla Firefox a couple of months ago to test how a website that I was working on looked with it. I had it installed for a few weeks then uninstalled it. I will never install it again!
Peg11

Some good info in here, too bad the usual fanboi bashings took place in the early postings. Must be some employees of a (very) specific company...

This is best described as a likely Gateway/Google evil conspiracy to hijack IE7 search options. I also bought a Gateway laptop... in June 2007. My registry entry for FindProvidersURL (i.e., 'Find more proivders' on the bottom left of the add/change search dialog in Internet Options of IE7) led to a Google search page, which neither gave nor allowed any other search engine to be selected. I did not have any option other than Google! In other words, I could not load any other search engine when selecting the 'Find More Providers' link in the dialog box.

I was finally able to add other search engines (thanks to an 'Ask Dave Taylor' article) after entering the IE7 default Microsoft FindProvidersURL into my browser and using the MS widget on that site. You can load numerous search engines and other commercial or term search options.

Moreover, I was also getting numerous time-wasting search errors that sent me to Google's images search results pages whenever I typed a URL that was not immediately loaded due to a slow DSL network or whatever other reason. This was caused by what can only be described as 'malware' due to it's lack of support from Google (apparently also installed by Gateway/Google) called the "Browser Address Error Redirector". Look for it in Programs... and uninstall it.

Google has adopted the same practices it loathed when faced with a huge Microsoft advantage in the market.

Jeff