Re: Windows Vista - SP2 - What functionality is removed this time?

breitak67

Many of the features you have listed as having been taken away have
actually been replaced with something better or, in some cases, simply
moved. In others they really have not changed at all.

File Type Management (file extension association) is now done with an
app rather than through the folder customization interface, which makes
a lot more sense to me. The tool is called "Default Programs" and is
located in the Control Panel.

"My Documents" is replaced by "Documents," which is permanently located
on the Windows Main Menu. You can opt to place your profile on the
desktop, or if you prefer just your documents you can still drag a
shortcut to your desktop.

You can still set permissions on fonts. You must be logged in as an
Admin. Goto to Control panel, Fonts tool. Right-click on a font,
select Properties. Goto the Security tab. Click the Edit button. Make
changes. Apply. Be careful not to mess with System Fonts.

The issue about opening more than 15 docs at once has been covered in
other threads ad nauseum, so I'll summarize - the disappearance of the
"Open" item in the context menu (right-click menu) when more than 15
files are selected occurs for apps with legacy shell integration. In
other words, the app with which the particular file type is associated
is at fault for using the old shell integration interface, not the OS.
Many apps are guilty of this - even some popular MS apps (MS Word 2007,
for example). The work-around for this is simple: open the target app,
select the files you want to open, and drag them to the app's title bar.
It was done intentionally for performance reasons and as more apps are
updated to do things the new way this will disappear.

The "dumbing down" of Windows Search happened because Google sued MS.
They wanted their 3rd-party desktop search engine to be on equal footing
with Windows Search and were upset that the excellent integration of
Windows Search with the OS gave the Microsoft product an unfair
competitive advantage. To avoid protracted litigation and a re-opening
of the "illegal bundling" wound that is costing MS so much money in
Europe, SP1 dumbed WS down so that Google's product had a chance. There
are ways to get it back, but, for obvious reasons, MS cannot have any
hand in making this happen or in making it easier for you to do it
yourself. Here's a related link:
'Microsoft details Vista SP1 search changes | InfoWorld | News |
2007-09-12 | By Elizabeth Montalbano, IDG News Service'
()

You can't place IE directly on the desktop, but you can place a
shortcut to IE to your desktop (which is really essentially the same
thing), you can use the QuickLaunch bar you can use a SideBar
app-launcher, or simply launch it from the Windows Menu.


--
breitak67

Steve Thackery

breitak67,

Don't waste your breath, mate. Lara wasn't really asking a question - she
just wanted to indulge in an anti-Vista rant.

Personally I wish people like her would just install Linux and leave us all
in peace.

SteveT

=?Utf-8?B?bGZvcmJlcw==?=

Actually it is not a rant at all. I just want the developers to stop getting
defensive and actually FIX Vista. I am forced to implement it in the next
year into my network and right now it will be a complete disaster and require
another server just for the duplicate profiles and Group policies.

"Steve Thackery" wrote:

> breitak67,
>
> Don't waste your breath, mate. Lara wasn't really asking a question - she
> just wanted to indulge in an anti-Vista rant.
>
> Personally I wish people like her would just install Linux and leave us all
> in peace.
>
> SteveT
>
>

B. Smith

"lforbes" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Actually it is not a rant at all. I just want the developers to stop
> getting
> defensive and actually FIX Vista. I am forced to implement it in the next
> year into my network and right now it will be a complete disaster and
> require
> another server just for the duplicate profiles and Group policies.
>

So, you might actually have to perform some duties you are being paid for ?
Quit whining.

Or just quit.
You get paid...DO IT.

Lazy little piglet.

Earle Horton

It's not "the developers" only you are talking about. There are program
managers, account managers, vice presidents and marketing weasels. The last
is what we called them when I worked for development. They are all justly
proud of their MBAs and their PhDs, and they believe that they took
something broken (XP) and made it into something beautiful and useful
(Vista). They don't understand why you don't like it and why you can't
accept it. They think you are blocking progress just because you are put
off by the idea of a "learning curve". How many person-hours would it take
to bring all the people you support up to speed on Vista, reduced
functionality and all?

I have seen a bit of a circular argument here. You need Vista to take
advantage of all the new hardware features that have come out. (XP is
available in 64-bit too.) You need the new hardware so you can run Vista.
Sure it's "cooler" but maybe it doesn't do all that much for people who need
to get a job done. What is happening in Detroit is an example of what
happens when an industry produces things that people don't want or need.

It's natural for people to be defensive after having done something stupid.
It's going to take a long time for the Vista "team" to lose some of their
defensiveness.

Earle

"lforbes" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Actually it is not a rant at all. I just want the developers to stop
> getting
> defensive and actually FIX Vista. I am forced to implement it in the next
> year into my network and right now it will be a complete disaster and
> require
> another server just for the duplicate profiles and Group policies.
>
> "Steve Thackery" wrote:
>
>> breitak67,
>>
>> Don't waste your breath, mate. Lara wasn't really asking a question -
>> she
>> just wanted to indulge in an anti-Vista rant.
>>
>> Personally I wish people like her would just install Linux and leave us
>> all
>> in peace.
>>
>> SteveT
>>
>>

=?Utf-8?B?bGZvcmJlcw==?=

"breitak67" wrote:

> File Type Management (file extension association) is now done with an
> app rather than through the folder customization interface, which makes
> a lot more sense to me. The tool is called "Default Programs" and is
> located in the Control Panel.
>

Thanks but the Default Programs tool does not actually modify the
HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT registry. Therefore it doesn't work about 50% of the time.
I have Office 2003 and Office 2007 on my machine (for testing in multiple
license network). After every update, MS changes the default BACK to Office
2003. If I go to Default Programs and specifically choose C:\Program
Files\Microsoft Office\Office12\Winword.exe it will say "ok" and show "Word"
and then just leave it at C:\Program Files\Microsoft
Office\Office11\winword.exe

Default Programs does not let you set multiple programs for the same file
type. Eg. with File Types Manager I could add "Open with Fireworks, Open with
Photoshop, Open with Paint etc. It also doesn't let you set a default action
like "Edit" instead of "Open" like I do with my vbs scripts.

> "My Documents" is replaced by "Documents," which is permanently located
> on the Windows Main Menu. You can opt to place your profile on the
> desktop, or if you prefer just your documents you can still drag a
> shortcut to your desktop.
>

Yes but in a network I have 2500 users. I need to set this in Group Policy.
Dragging a shortcut is not going to work with 2500 profiles where their My
Documents are in all different locations. Also giving users full visual
access to their Profile folder where they can delete essential files is a big
disaster waiting to happen. Right now they cannot see C:\ so although they
can write to their profile through programs they cannot actually access it
through Explorer.

> You can still set permissions on fonts. You must be logged in as an
> Admin. Goto to Control panel, Fonts tool. Right-click on a font,
> select Properties. Goto the Security tab. Click the Edit button. Make
> changes. Apply. Be careful not to mess with System Fonts.
>
Thanks for that. I didn't know I could set on individual fonts. I usually
set security on the Fonts folder itself. Users cannot have access to write
fonts to the Font folder. I am not sure with Vista because I can't even see
the security tab for the fonts folder.

> The issue about opening more than 15 docs at once has been covered in
> other threads ad nauseum, so I'll summarize - the disappearance of the
> "Open" item in the context menu (right-click menu) when more than 15
> files are selected occurs for apps with legacy shell integration. In
> other words, the app with which the particular file type is associated
> is at fault for using the old shell integration interface, not the OS.
> Many apps are guilty of this - even some popular MS apps (MS Word 2007,
> for example). The work-around for this is simple: open the target app,
> select the files you want to open, and drag them to the app's title bar.
> It was done intentionally for performance reasons and as more apps are
> updated to do things the new way this will disappear.
>

Yes I did find the threads about this. I guess in 10 years when all the
applications catch up then it won't be an issue. Unfortunately even Microsoft
Default installed applications like Paint and Notepad don't even support this
new shell. Not to mention Office 2007.

> The "dumbing down" of Windows Search happened because Google sued MS.
> They wanted their 3rd-party desktop search engine to be on equal footing
> with Windows Search and were upset that the excellent integration of
> Windows Search with the OS gave the Microsoft product an unfair
> competitive advantage. To avoid protracted litigation and a re-opening
> of the "illegal bundling" wound that is costing MS so much money in
> Europe, SP1 dumbed WS down so that Google's product had a chance. There
> are ways to get it back, but, for obvious reasons, MS cannot have any
> hand in making this happen or in making it easier for you to do it
> yourself. Here's a related link:
> 'Microsoft details Vista SP1 search changes | InfoWorld | News |
> 2007-09-12 | By Elizabeth Montalbano, IDG News Service'
> ()

Just removing the Search from the right click shouldn't have been the
solution to this. That left everyone without any search at all. I don't use
Google but I have the choice in IE who I want to have as my default. Why
couldn't they have just created an application that gave you a choice on what
Search product to use and then include the context menus for that?
Personally I prefer the Windows XP search. I don't like the indexing at all
because 90% of the files I search for are not indexed (being windows files).

> You can't place IE directly on the desktop, but you can place a
> shortcut to IE to your desktop (which is really essentially the same
> thing), you can use the QuickLaunch bar you can use a SideBar
> app-launcher, or simply launch it from the Windows Menu.
>

Again 2500 users issue. This was done automatically before and could be
turned off via Group Policy. Because it was removed with even XP SP3 it has
created a DISASTER of calls in my network with everyone trying to figure out
what happened to their IE icon. Also right clicking the IE gave the Internet
Features which is not the same with the icon.

Thanks anyway. I am just praying that the MS developers get their heads out
of the sand and fix the problems with Windows 7 or I will be switching to
Linux or Mac.

Steve Thackery

> I just want the developers to stop getting
> defensive and actually FIX Vista.

To be fair, I think MS have got the message. They openly admit that Vista
"wasn't ready", and the failures in the development process are well known
(for instance the Great Longhorn Reset, and the last minute rewrite of WPF).

They've taken a completely different approach to Windows 7, and I think W7
*will* fix Vista.

But I've just re-read your original message and I don't believe you've done
one jot of research into Vista. Most of the "missing functionality" is just
changed functionality which you haven't discovered yet. That's why I sniff
a rant - your list of so-called "missing functionality" is just bollocks.

Incidentally, if you haven't rolled out Vista yet, and it may be up to a
year before you do, I would recommend you convince your management to hang
on for a bit longer and go straight to W7. Let's be honest, for virtually
all corporate use there's simply no case for moving away from XP.

BUT, having said all that - if your job were easy you wouldn't get paid so
much, would you? So don't whine and find excuses not to do it - that's not
in your job description. What IS in your job description is to INFORM
yourself about what the REAL issues are, instead of talking rubbish about
not being able to put IE on the desktop, when you can put a shortcut to it
instead, for christ's sake.

Nah, sorry, it was a rant, and your protestations to the contrary ring
hollow.

SteveT

B. Smith

"Earle Horton" <.invalid> wrote in message
news:.gbl...
SNIP babble.

What is happening in Detroit is an example of what
> happens when an industry produces things that people don't want or need.
>
>
> Earle
>

Another idiot that knows not what he says.
The American auto industry sells way more vehicle units...so they sell what
the consumer wants.

But the labor cost end in an unprofitable situation for American Automotive
companies.

Toyota = $48/hr labor+benefits.
GM= $84/hr labor+benefits.

The UAW will not give in paying morons to turn a ***** $28.00/hr.

GM is $86 BILLION in debt.

This did not happen in the last 6 months.

It is an inevitable outcome of unrestrained pay limits, labor and
management.

No one in their right mind would pay a CEO 15 million to lose money.

Yet the auto industry does.

Its a bad joke.

Haha.

Forklift drivers make over $100,000 a year.
Salary only.

Good goly.

Steve Thackery

Lara,

Please ignore my message, and please accept my apologies. Your original
email made no mention that the issues were from the aspect of centralised
administration of a large network.

From an individual computer user's point of view, they are all completely
non-issues. But now that you've explained where you are coming from in
subsequent messages, I understand why they are problematical.

Sorry for misinterpreting you. Next time, though, perhaps you could mention
the context a bit more clearly! :-)

SteveT

Clark

Steve Thackery wrote:
> breitak67,
>
> Don't waste your breath, mate. Lara wasn't really asking a question -
> she just wanted to indulge in an anti-Vista rant.
>
> Personally I wish people like her would just install Linux and leave us
> all in peace.
>
> SteveT

The information breitak67 supplied will be very helpful for me, since I
an just now upgrading to Vista. I appreciate the comments made by
iforbes, and since this group is here to help Vista users, your comments
are inappropriate.

Clark