i know this aint phone/PDA related but im at a loss to explain how this works.
i picked this up over the weekend via torrents thinking it would be full of viruses but turned out not only to be virus free but to work flawlessly.
did anyone else manage to get it? ive been able to run it on PCs running XP SP1 and XP SP2 both with a standard install of office 03.
the USB 07 seems to only load what it needs to into memory the really wierd part is it comes with 7 files with only one being 500 meg
MSTORE.EXE 21kb
EXCEL.EXE 35kb
WINWORD.EXE 53kb
OIS.EXE 36kb
POWERPNT.EXE 50kb
OFFDIAG.EXE 209kb
MSACCESS.EXE 531,148 kb
and yes ive done 2 virus scans with 2 different scanners LOL
any ideas?
Be interesting to see, i've found the torrent and am going to have a go this evening.
Perhaps its only the exe files that differ to a 2003 installation or is that far too simplistic a view?
Surely there have to be some features that don't work properly?
prehaps its a version that will work off a USB drive without being installed?
Imp
Office 2007 Basic lists its requirements as 1.5Gb HD Space, it would take a lot of work to thin this to 1/3 of the size and maintain functionality.
However....
I have tried this myself now, works on Vista Ultimate with office 2003 installed. Also ran it on XP sp2 with no office installed and also tried them both with no connection to the internet present and all apps ran fine.
Did you notice that it said powered by thinstall on startup.
Have a look at
http://www.thinstall.com/sales/pres...install.com/products/resources_get.php?aid=14
Appears that it is an up to date version of this.
I've just read and did a search around, there are definately some running wild in the net. Ok, even if they run nicely now, do you think there will be an expiry date on it making it invalid say .. tomorrow? anyway, i did a check on this 'thinstall' as well, it seems that they have OpenOffice in 100MB .. that's nice enough for me. I'm supporter of OpenOffice.
yeah i been using it for 3 days now with not many issues on serivce pack 2 XP. had a few funky errors but nothing that didnt occur more than once.
it has everything available even the million rows in excel and the few new formulas in excel and access.
its very nice if you cant use 07, microsoft should look at selling it on USB keys LOL!!
@ sparky yeah i did some googles and saw that one. was interesting that you tried it on a computer with no office on it, was talking with a friend who wanted to try that too.
still baffled by its size and power given the size of the proper version.
yeah open office is ok but its no office 07 with black interface LOL
I'm trying to Remotely access my computer with Remote Desktop Mobile. I have it built into my ROM and was browsing Youtube and saw Windows XP on this guys PDA..obviously RDM. What do I have to do to set this up. Thanks.
gqstatus0685 said:
I'm trying to Remotely access my computer with Remote Desktop Mobile. I have it built into my ROM and was browsing Youtube and saw Windows XP on this guys PDA..obviously RDM. What do I have to do to set this up. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is so special about the video, can you post the link? If your on your home network on wifi you can remote to your pc or connect thru the data connection if you have a public box.
-McMex
See this link for how to enable remote desktop on your PC, how to setup your router/firewall to allow it to connect to the outside world and DDNS services for name resolution. I've briefly read through it and have confirmed it provides all that you'd need to set up Windows XP to allow remote desktop connectivity from any device (RDP capable phone, Linux, PC, Mac, etc.)
If you need specific help for Vista, I'm sure Google will give you what you need, if you change my search parameters "remote desktop firewall" to include 'Vista'. I still think the link given above will still be of use, Vista or not...
Hope this helps!
there a reason you dont want to use the free edition of logmein.com ?
Im d/l'ing log me in right now. Thanks man appreciate it
can you tell me what setting you have on your tilt. So i can use the screen space on my phone to the max without making it look weird.
Im really thinking I should finally upgrade.
But due to lazy, I've been holding back on my own PC.
I like windows XP with the zune theme, its pretty.
Do you guys think I should go for windows 7 now?
Windows 7 > XP to be honest. I have no issues with it what so ever and have converted my pc's and laptops to it.
Its a decent OS, by Microsofts standards. Its prettier then xp, too
It's been a while since I've had a PC to call my own, but I loved Windows 7 more than XP. I used the Ultimate RC for a while and anything that didn't work well natively worked fine in the VirtualPC XP image.
Win 7: The best OS MS has ever made
7 it is then
7 ftw
way better than xp
lonelykatana said:
Im really thinking I should finally upgrade.
But due to lazy, I've been holding back on my own PC.
I like windows XP with the zune theme, its pretty.
Do you guys think I should go for windows 7 now?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Switch to linux!
Deodexed said:
Switch to linux!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Already dual booting ubuntu
To be honest, unless you need to upgrade you might as well stick with XP.
It's got the better classic menu system, and the quicklaunch toolbar doesn't need a hack to work.
You can get aero snap and peek for XP now too.
It depends how you use it though. If you're more of a power user then XP is a hell of a lot easier, where as if you're just a home user then W7 is numptified for that target audience.
I use XP, Vista and W7, and to be honest I prefer XP and I hate to say it, Vista.
W7 has some nice features such as aero snap/peek but as I've mentioned they are now available on XP/Vista.
I hate the numpty menu system where it's quicker to type the name of the program rather than click on it (it now takes more clicks to start programs with W7 anyway) and you can't arrange things how you like.
Getting to network properties with W7 is a PITA, not much of an issue for home users, but working in support at users' sites we need to be able to easily change our network settings.
Having to "force shutdown" programs when I want to turn the computer off has gotten old very fast!
The removal of "All Users" from the user profiles folder is also frustrating.
Still, it's got less bloat than vista, so chances are it'll run faster, and in many cases faster than XP.
the major improvement on Windows 7 to Xp IMO is the ability to have the start bar what ever color you like
Max, you could also do that in xp too....
Good old themexp...
lonelykatana said:
Already dual booting ubuntu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Linux is a dead end on the Desktop.
For gaming it's out, and if you rely on interoperability with Windows users in an office setting it's pretty much out. Use Exchange? It's out. Do Audio or Video editing? It's pretty much out due to the bad/fragmented sound architecture and poor performance of the Open Source graphics drivers (some people may be able to use proprietary drivers).
KDE is still trying to look like Windows Vista. Apparently Unaware that Windows 7 released a year ago. GNOME still looks like a depressed, yet less snazzy, version of OS/2 Workplace Shell.
There are so many issues with Linux on the desktop. If you want a UNIX desktop, get a Mac. Those actually work quite well
xaccers said:
To be honest, unless you need to upgrade you might as well stick with XP.
It's got the better classic menu system, and the quicklaunch toolbar doesn't need a hack to work.
You can get aero snap and peek for XP now too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only an [actually, I don't know a good word to put here. I shall consult a thesaurus one of these days] would say the Windows XP Start Menu is better than Vista, much less Windows 7 Start Menu. Aero Peek and Snap are only small Usability Enhancements when it comes to Windows 7. It's much more than that.
Both Vista and 7 can use a Classic Menu, but the Classic Menu has always been kinda terrible becase it doesn't automatically sort itself and can either run off the screen or take up 1/3rd of you screen. It's a colossal waste of screen real-estate navigate it, and finding applications is cumbersom compared to latter Windows Versions, where you can press the Windows Key and just start typing. In Windows XP you have to install Windows Search and use the Taskbar Toolbar.
Also, XP and Vista's Taskbar is pretty much a waste of screen real estate when you compare the functionality to that in Windows 7. Pinned Websites on the Windows 7 Taskbar are a bit of a revelation (an IE9 feature). Jump Lists? The way Jump Lists are integrated into the Start Menu allowing you to get at recently opened documents/internet history without loading the application and looking through a menu/dialog first?
I use XP, Vista and W7, and to be honest I prefer XP and I hate to say it, Vista.
W7 has some nice features such as aero snap/peek but as I've mentioned they are now available on XP/Vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If Aero Peek/Snap are the types of "nice features" that come to mind when you think of Windows 7, then I don't know what to say...
I hate the numpty menu system where it's quicker to type the name of the program rather than click on it (it now takes more clicks to start programs with W7 anyway) and you can't arrange things how you like.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because typing the name is supposed to be faster than clicking on it unless you type 2 characters per minute.
You don't need to type the whole application (or file) name. You type part of it and it searches the index as you enter characters. That's a huge improvement in usability in Vista/7 and Microsoft Backported Windows Search to Windows XP for that very reason. The only difference is that it's in a Taskbar Toolbar instead of the Start Menu, which makes it less productive than Vista/7's Integrated Windows search.
KDE on Linux took a similar Approach to Vista (as they always do for good Windows features, Lol) and integrated Search into the K menu. On OpenSUSE Novell integrated Desktop Search into the GNOME Slab menu.
There are always some people who like to work like they did a decade ago, but usability has gone forward in Windows, not backwards. Navigating a Classic Start Menu for applications is an unacceptable use case these days. That's why so many Linux users complained about KDE/GNOME's cluttered menus, prompting them to clean them up and integrate Desktop Search...
I don't want to have to arrange applications in a menu. The OS should put applications over folders and arrange them alphabetically. The Classic Menu Structure never did this. That is why it was a PITA. Users should not have to manage their Application Menu. That's not acceptable, these days.
Getting to network properties with W7 is a PITA, not much of an issue for home users, but working in support at users' sites we need to be able to easily change our network settings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh?
Right Click on your network icon in the System tray -> "Open Network and Sharing Center" -> Click "Local Area Connection" -> Click "Properties"
That takes 5 seconds or less to do, depending on where the mouse is on the screen.
The problem obviously isn't Windows, here.
Having to "force shutdown" programs when I want to turn the computer off has gotten old very fast!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has to be done because if you press shutdown and an application has dirty data that you don't want to lose, you have a chance to cancel the shutdown and save that data to disk. This happens in Windows XP as well, the .NET broadcaster (or whatever it's called) always hangs on a Shutdown. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that sees it cause I just reinstalled XP on my Dell and it happens in a completely fresh install.
The issue isn't Windows 7. It's the application. This is like complaining that Microsoft Outlook stopped to ask you if you REALLY want to empty you Deleted Items folder when you Exit it. It's a failsafe just in case you forgot about something, or want to double check yourself.
In any case, bad apps are bad. If the App is doing it, then report to the developer so they can see why and hopefully issue a patch.
The removal of "All Users" from the user profiles folder is also frustrating.
Still, it's got less bloat than vista, so chances are it'll run faster, and in many cases faster than XP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All users was renamed in Windows Vista. Where have you been the past 4-5 years. Instead of All Users, it's Public. That more accurately gives the purpose of that folder. All Users is the Public folder on Windows XP. Do you want to complain that they Documents and Settings to Users, as well? My Documents to Documents? My Music to Music? See where I'm going here?
MacaronyMax said:
the major improvement on Windows 7 to Xp IMO is the ability to have the start bar what ever color you like
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows Vista didn't have any bloat. It had redundant Applications.
Things like Windows Mail, Photo Gallery, Calendar, Contacts, Movie Maker, etc. simply weren't needed and it got too bad when you had applications like Outlook and Live Essentials installed. You couldn't uninstall them.
Windows XP has similar redundant applications. Outlook Express, Windows Messenger, MSN Explorer, Windows Movie Maker, etc.
It's not that the applications add bloat. If you look at Internet Explorer it's very small. They don't actually take up all that much space because they use System Libraries/Components and wrap them in many cases (Outlook Express is like < 10 MB on Windows XP, for example). It's that they were unneeded redundancies and made the OS harder to harden. Security Exploits can be found in those applications. Decoupling as much of them from the Windows OS actually makes the OS more secure, and yes, it does decrease it's percieved weight.
Windows 7 outperforms Windows Vista simply because the OS is better. The performance difference isn't really all that dramatic compared to Vista with the latest Service Packs, but the usability enhancements augment it. You can get a lot of things done much quicker on Windows 7 than on Vista or XP.
On top of that, I'm sure Microsoft's developer tools matured and produce somewhat better code.
If you are running a 64-Bit machine, it's almost not even worth it to run XP over Vista or 7, IMHO.
If you are a gamer, XP is practically dead due to it not having DX10.x/11.
XP is a magnitude less secure than Vista or 7. It doesn't even have Mandatory Integrity Control, which is IMO a showstopper to consider it considering the amount of malware writters and hackers that target Windows (due to it's marketshare) and attack it through [for example] the browser.
The Taskbar in Windows 7 is a big deal, when you actually start to use it, pin Web Site, and Pin Applications that support it's features (or just run those applications, to be honest). Jump lists save tons of screen real estate when running Applications like Windows Live Messenger, and if you Pin Winows Live to the Task Bar (again, via IE9) you can Create a Mail, go to Calendar or Contacts, etc. without first opening a browser and going to the page through the Jump List. If you pin the Windows Team Blog it has every section in the Jump List and you can go to, e.g. the Windows Live Blog without having to go through the website (of course, you can also just use an RSS reader for something like that, but that's just an example). Media player controls are in the Jump List (as well as Zune Player). etc. etc.
captainstu72 said:
Max, you could also do that in xp too....
Good old themexp...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem with the Windows Task Bar isn't the color. It's the fact that it's borderline useless. You could change the taskbar color in Vista too. That didn't make it anything but "as useful as the XP task bar."
N8ter said:
...
The problem with the Windows Task Bar isn't the color. It's the fact that it's borderline useless. You could change the taskbar color in Vista too. That didn't make it anything but "as useful as the XP task bar."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you missed that I was all for windows 7 and not XP, and that if Max only wanted to colour the taskbar, it could be done in XP.
xaccers said:
To be honest, unless you need to upgrade you might as well stick with XP.
It's got the better classic menu system, and the quicklaunch toolbar doesn't need a hack to work.
You can get aero snap and peek for XP now too.
It depends how you use it though. If you're more of a power user then XP is a hell of a lot easier, where as if you're just a home user then W7 is numptified for that target audience.
I use XP, Vista and W7, and to be honest I prefer XP and I hate to say it, Vista.
W7 has some nice features such as aero snap/peek but as I've mentioned they are now available on XP/Vista.
I hate the numpty menu system where it's quicker to type the name of the program rather than click on it (it now takes more clicks to start programs with W7 anyway) and you can't arrange things how you like.
Getting to network properties with W7 is a PITA, not much of an issue for home users, but working in support at users' sites we need to be able to easily change our network settings.
Having to "force shutdown" programs when I want to turn the computer off has gotten old very fast!
The removal of "All Users" from the user profiles folder is also frustrating.
Still, it's got less bloat than vista, so chances are it'll run faster, and in many cases faster than XP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how to you get the aero snap and peak on xp???
N8er summed it up pretty well.
XP is an old redundant operating system. For one thing, XP is FAR less secure than 7.
7 is functionally superior...it's more productive and user friendly, while at the same time being much more powerful for "power users".
Those saying it's been "numptified" obviously dont use any of the "non-numpty" features
Only my opinion, the opinion of an IT Sys Admin (plus a member of the Microsoft technical beta test team for Windows 7).
My advice to the OP...going to 7 is the only way to go...just make sure your hardware is capable.
N8ter said:
Only an [actually, I don't know a good word to put here. I shall consult a thesaurus one of these days] would say the Windows XP Start Menu is better than Vista, much less Windows 7 Start Menu. Aero Peek and Snap are only small Usability Enhancements when it comes to Windows 7. It's much more than that.
Both Vista and 7 can use a Classic Menu, but the Classic Menu has always been kinda terrible becase it doesn't automatically sort itself and can either run off the screen or take up 1/3rd of you screen. It's a colossal waste of screen real-estate navigate it, and finding applications is cumbersom compared to latter Windows Versions, where you can press the Windows Key and just start typing. In Windows XP you have to install Windows Search and use the Taskbar Toolbar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The classic menu was removed form W7. It enabled users to work more efficiently (especially for the physically impaired where keyboards aren't practical or quick). Quick launch for most commonly used programs, nice and neat without taking up too much space. First menu for regularly used apps (ie just click on the start button), and so on depending on frequency of use.
Instead now we have to hack the quick launch toolbar back into existance, clicking on the IE icon pinned to the task ribbon doesn't bring up a new instance of IE it just opens or minimises once instance (you now have to right click it to then be able to open a second instance), applications are grouped so you can't use your own work process, and woe betide you click on a well populated group in the start menu by mistake! Having to use the search function exposes the failings of the menu system.
N8ter said:
Also, XP and Vista's Taskbar is pretty much a waste of screen real estate when you compare the functionality to that in Windows 7. Pinned Websites on the Windows 7 Taskbar are a bit of a revelation (an IE9 feature). Jump Lists? The way Jump Lists are integrated into the Start Menu allowing you to get at recently opened documents/internet history without loading the application and looking through a menu/dialog first?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The great thing about XP/Vista taskbar is that you can see, without having to put the mouse over each app, what they are. Grouping of apps is a feature which only becomes bearable in W7 because of the popup preview (an improvement on the Vista preview I have to say).
Jump lists to to recent docs is a great feature.
N8ter said:
That's because typing the name is supposed to be faster than clicking on it unless you type 2 characters per minute.
You don't need to type the whole application (or file) name. You type part of it and it searches the index as you enter characters. That's a huge improvement in usability in Vista/7 and Microsoft Backported Windows Search to Windows XP for that very reason. The only difference is that it's in a Taskbar Toolbar instead of the Start Menu, which makes it less productive than Vista/7's Integrated Windows search.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It shows the shortcomings of the menu system in W7. It's also, as I've mentioned before, not very user friendly to those who find typing difficult.
It's also not helpful to those users (oh there are hundreds of them unfortunately) that don't know the name of the app they use, the sort that say they aren't running XP but 2007 (what they mean is office), that navigate to the apps by the icons, that think their monitor is the computer and the thing under the desk is a "hard drive"
N8ter said:
I don't want to have to arrange applications in a menu. The OS should put applications over folders and arrange them alphabetically. The Classic Menu Structure never did this. That is why it was a PITA. Users should not have to manage their Application Menu. That's not acceptable, these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So users shouldn't be able to customise their computers? You're not an iPhone user are you?
N8ter said:
Huh?
Right Click on your network icon in the System tray -> "Open Network and Sharing Center" -> Click "Local Area Connection" -> Click "Properties"
That takes 5 seconds or less to do, depending on where the mouse is on the screen.
The problem obviously isn't Windows, here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except in W7; right click network icon in system tray > Open network and sharing center > move up and click on Manage network connections > right click network connection
Classic menu; Click start then flow through settings (no 2 second wait unlike W7's menu) > network connections > right click the network connection
Heck you can even do that just as easily using only the keyboard.
N8ter said:
This has to be done because if you press shutdown and an application has dirty data that you don't want to lose, you have a chance to cancel the shutdown and save that data to disk. This happens in Windows XP as well, the .NET broadcaster (or whatever it's called) always hangs on a Shutdown. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that sees it cause I just reinstalled XP on my Dell and it happens in a completely fresh install.
The issue isn't Windows 7. It's the application. This is like complaining that Microsoft Outlook stopped to ask you if you REALLY want to empty you Deleted Items folder when you Exit it. It's a failsafe just in case you forgot about something, or want to double check yourself.
In any case, bad apps are bad. If the App is doing it, then report to the developer so they can see why and hopefully issue a patch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not because office has a doc open. I'd love to be able to tell you which app is causing it, but W7 doesn't tell me. System tray is empty of all but W7 icons. I've seen it on several W7 machines, some just after W7 has been installed from scratch.
N8ter said:
All users was renamed in Windows Vista. Where have you been the past 4-5 years. Instead of All Users, it's Public. That more accurately gives the purpose of that folder. All Users is the Public folder on Windows XP. Do you want to complain that they Documents and Settings to Users, as well? My Documents to Documents? My Music to Music? See where I'm going here?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You what? I think you'll find there's a difference between Public and All Users.
The all users profile is used to apply settings etc to, I'm sure you can guess; all users.
In Vista/W7 it was moved to C:\ProgramData. The all users desktop etc was moved over the the Public profile.
So now if you install an app and it adds shortcuts to the All Users start menu, but you want to move it to the desktop, it's no longer in the same tree, which when you're using scripts to do things becomes a PITA.
I'll give you an example, from a cmd prompt, do a dir in the following directories:
C:\users\all users\desktop
C:\users\public\desktop
Now they're the same location, you can test this by making a directory in all users\desktop and it will appear in public\desktop, but do a dir again and nothing.
xaccers said:
The classic menu was removed form W7. It enabled users to work more efficiently (especially for the physically impaired where keyboards aren't practical or quick). Quick launch for most commonly used programs, nice and neat without taking up too much space. First menu for regularly used apps (ie just click on the start button), and so on depending on frequency of use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're starting to sound REALLY bad. Seriously, you are.
Quick Laugh has been superceded by the Window 7 Taskbar. You can pin appliations to it, and there are jump lists. Quick Launch is useless compared to that taskbar.
For the physically impaired the Windows 7 Start Menu is better. Windows 7 also has better Accessibility tools than both Vista and XP. You're not going to win any wars on that front. Windows 7 is better than both.
For the physically impaired the "Disorganized by default" Windows Classic Menu has proven to be worse than the new Windows Vista/7 Menu type. Windows Vista/7 also has monumentally better built-in speech recognition than Windows XP.
Instead now we have to hack the quick launch toolbar back into existance, clicking on the IE icon pinned to the task ribbon doesn't bring up a new instance of IE it just opens or minimises once instance (you now have to right click it to then be able to open a second instance), applications are grouped so you can't use your own work process, and woe betide you click on a well populated group in the start menu by mistake! Having to use the search function exposes the failings of the menu system.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hack it into existence?
In an IE instance you press the new tab button behind the last tab, or you right click it on the task bar adn select "Open New Tab." Are you actually trying to convince us you're retarded?
Also, yes the menu system is full of fail. That's why Windows Vista did away with the classic programs menu structure of Windows XP. Thanks for agreeing with me that the Classic Meny was utter ***. I appreciate it.
The great thing about XP/Vista taskbar is that you can see, without having to put the mouse over each app, what they are. Grouping of apps is a feature which only becomes bearable in W7 because of the popup preview (an improvement on the Vista preview I have to say).
Jump lists to to recent docs is a great feature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can easily tell what they are in Windows 7. Windows 7's Icon-Based Task Bar also allows you to have more applicatiosn open before the task bar become unusably cluttered. You can tell if you have multiple instances/tabs open in an application because there is a visible indicator. Unless you're computer is utter crap, it does not take any amount of time to get tot he tab you want.
It shows the shortcomings of the menu system in W7. It's also, as I've mentioned before, not very user friendly to those who find typing difficult.
It's also not helpful to those users (oh there are hundreds of them unfortunately) that don't know the name of the app they use, the sort that say they aren't running XP but 2007 (what they mean is office), that navigate to the apps by the icons, that think their monitor is the computer and the thing under the desk is a "hard drive"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What?
Like I said, better accessibility tools, better speech recognition, and it's actually easier to find stuff in Windows 7 because Windows search is so good, jump lists, and the menu organizes itself - unline earlier versions of Windows.
What are you talking about...
If they don't know the name of the app they use, then they will likely find it faster in Windows 7 (or even Vista) than XP.
Windows 7 also defaults to medium sized desktop icons, which makes it easier on the eyes for people with Visual impairments.
So users shouldn't be able to customise their computers? You're not an iPhone user are you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does butchering up a menu to make it as disorganized as possible have to do with customizing you computer? People want their apps to be organized. Hardly anyone cares about mixing things up this way. If they ared, they would all be running Linux + KDE, which is the epitome of customization.
Linux's 1% marketshare and the fact that apple has 10x more with an OS that is less customizable than Windows speaks for itself.
I use an Android phone. No, I don't hack of my phone or rom jump. I like to get work done, not play around and cry on a forum about how I soft bricked it or corrupted a system file.
Except in W7; right click network icon in system tray > Open network and sharing center > move up and click on Manage network connections > right click network connection
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Incorrect. Your network connection is on the page in the Network and Sharing Center. You can simply Click on it and click Properties on that page to get to it.
Classic menu; Click start then flow through settings (no 2 second wait unlike W7's menu) > network connections > right click the network connection
Heck you can even do that just as easily using only the keyboard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't need to go through the Start Menu on Windows XP. You can right Click Network/My Network Places on the desktop and get to all that.
Obviously you're a complete and utter rookie when it comes to using computers.
BTW, you can also Right Click Network on Windows 7 and Properties will take you to Network and Sharing Center. Then you just Click your Connection and click Properties. You only need to go to Manage Network if you have multiple network cards plugged into a network (i.e. a Wired Network plugged it a Router, in addition to a Wireless Network). Typically Windows will use Wired when available, and fall back to Wireless automatically so you should almost never have to click on the Manage link.
It's not because office has a doc open. I'd love to be able to tell you which app is causing it, but W7 doesn't tell me. System tray is empty of all but W7 icons. I've seen it on several W7 machines, some just after W7 has been installed from scratch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apps and Services run in the background. Not all of them have a System Tray Icon. That is all I will say on that.
You what? I think you'll find there's a difference between Public and All Users.
The all users profile is used to apply settings etc to, I'm sure you can guess; all users.
In Vista/W7 it was moved to C:\ProgramData. The all users desktop etc was moved over the the Public profile.
So now if you install an app and it adds shortcuts to the All Users start menu, but you want to move it to the desktop, it's no longer in the same tree, which when you're using scripts to do things becomes a PITA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Incorrect. There were some fundamental Changes in Vista/7, but you will find that C:\Users\<Name>\AppData still exists. That's the Application Data folder (previously under C:\Documents and Settings\<User>).
I'd also like to remind you that very long path names can cause issues with older applications and can lead to environment conflicts. Folder names like Documents and Settings and Application Data are just terrible. They had to get rid of that crap. It also makes navigating via Explorer (cause some folders are hidden by default) and the command line cludgy as hell. Windows XP sometimes wants the path in quotes, sometimes not. It just depends on where you type it in.
I'll give you an example, from a cmd prompt, do a dir in the following directories:
C:\users\all users\desktop
C:\users\public\desktop
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The way it should be. There should be no Desktop Folder in the Public folder. It's for sharing files, not profiles. Bad things happen when a profile gets infected/corrupted and new users use it. Security is utmost.
Now they're the same location, you can test this by making a directory in all users\desktop and it will appear in public\desktop, but do a dir again and nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, you found out NTFS supports links now (well... on a consumer level and not just hidden functionality). Great. Yes, there is a link for that folder because older applications written for XP still have paths hard coded in them. That needed to be done for compatibility reasons.
You should spend more time actually using the OS. You don't actually know much at all...
MOD EDIT: Foul Language removed
Another thing.
Even Microsoft is dropping support for XP in it's client applications.
Windows Live Essentials 2011 doesn't support Windows XP. Windows Live Movie Maker never supported XP (it's different/better than Windows Movie Maker in XP/Vista). Don't expect the next version of Office to support XP. IE9 is not being released on Windows XP, and if you're used the beta, you'd know that once it's released there will be no reason to install a third-party browser on Windows unless you're an add-on'aholic.
Lots of Graphics/Audio/Video Applications will began to drop XP due to the lack of APIs from Windows 7/Vista that were backported. Lots of hardware will start to drop support for XP once its extended support runs out.
On top of that, Windows 7 Pro/Ultimate has Windows XP Mode which allows you to run XP/XP Apps seamlessly on top of Windows 7 for compatibility reasons.
Windows XP is a dead end. It's time to move on. Better than Linux. Worse than Vista/7 by a long shot.
EDIT: Also, if you're a developer you're not doing yourself any favors by running XP as your main OS, instead of just in a VM or on an older machine for testing.
WPF applications get no hardware accelleration on Windows XP, so they run like crap as well. That includes quite a few newer applications that use it in some form or another in the UI layer.
Deodexed said:
Switch to linux!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 ... Linux has them both beat.
@ all - Please don't make this thread a flame war, if I see this coming I´ll close this and start sending offenders on vacations from xda.
@ N8ter: I removed your foul language and I will kindly ask you to respect other members, since this thread should be a mature exchanging of opinions (eventhough it's on off-topic) consider this as a friendly first and final warning.
Microsoft next operating system for PC's will be Windows 8, something which I don't wanna go and use.
They use the metro interface and I don't see in anyway how this is suited for power users and pc in general, its looks more suited for an tablet.
So for me its an reason for not even wanna test Windows 8, I will skip it and if I didnt use Windows for playing CoD MW3 then I would switch for sure, because with Linux you have many choices in desktop inviroments, like KDE, GNOME, XFCE and others.
Where I do find KDE the best, there interface is modern and they keep improving and bug fixing.
Ofcourse we saw how Ubuntu suddenly introduced unity as standard user interface and dropped GNOME, but atleast you have choices. And not to forget Linux is lighter then Windows and does not need virus scanner.
You can turn off the metro interface in settings and go back to default windows style.
Then I have an Windows 7 look or what? But they still force the interface default onto you, as you say I need to switch to the default Windows style.
Yes, it'll look like Win7 with a couple of new features and such. You can download the Preview now and test it for yourself.
But Windows is an operating system you need pay for. Unless you buy an new notebook, why would you upgrade to Windows 8?
Yes I can test it? But like you say if I put off metro interface its Windows 7 with a couple more features, that is also reason why I consider to switch to Linux, if you have an Xbox 360 or PS3 for gaming then the gaming is not an problem.
I also feel performance with Linux is better, boot time is faster also, but I don't dare to switch because I have one app called QQ that I use to communicate and I already tested in an virtual machine how the video chat off webQQ 3.0 works, it will give receiver and link which you can see the person using webQQ.
I would switch if it wasnt for game part and this one app called QQ.
- QQ(Web)
- QQ for Linux
You can use WINE for gaming. You can check which games works with Wine here
Windows 8 has been written mainly with touchscreens in mind, hence the metro interface. If it's not a touchscreen device then you turn off metro and use it like standard Windows, but with new features. Personally, I don't see any difference between going from Windows 8 to Linux or going from Windows 7 to Linux. Basically, Windows to Linux is what we're talking about here and it's like asking if you prefer apples or oranges. I like both, but I don't have a favourite. I'd rather have both so I can pick and chose what suits at the time.
LordManhattan said:
- QQ(Web)
- QQ for Linux
You can use WINE for gaming. You can check which games works with Wine here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes I check Wine database before I do something drastrical, because my GPU also needs https://github.com/Bumblebee-Project/Bumblebee
So I know that wine can solve it, but in case off QQ and CoD MW3 it does not work. The Linux version off QQ only exists because the Chinese goverment putted pressure on Tecent to make an client for Linux.
Right now it doesn't even has an reason to exist, because using WebQQ 3.0 gives you more features then the Linux version, but I tested it and you can use video chat in WebQQ but your contact will get your video in an webbrowser, not in her or his QQ window.
So I tested it all before even installing Linux, because really I like KDE, but how are you going explain to your friends, sorry you need start using Skype with me because there is no good QQ client with proper video chat for Linux.
For OSX there is, so hackintosh is possible.
Both Windows and Linux are different platform and used for different purpose.
So its not like going to Linux, if Windows fails.
For something you need Linux, and for something you need Windows.
And for something you need Mac OSX too.
There you wrong in, all can be used as desktop operating system, the only difference is you probably use other apps for certain tasks.
So will you use iTunes for music on OSX, but in Linux you will use another app which offers same functionality.
Only thing what is still an fact is that Windows is better if you like use your pc for gaming, Linux does not have many games, osx is the same story but there are still more games for OSX then Linux.
I can name an list off app which you can use on all three.
Firefox
VMWare
Virtualbox
Skype
VLC
Chrome
Handbrake
Sabnzbd+
And for most Windows software you will find alternatives, but IM software can be sometimes an problem. Like Gimp is an alternative for photoshop and Gimp can also be used on Windows.
But its true that you will find some software not on Linux, but you can always use wine for trying the Windows software and wine is not an emulator.
DexterMorganNL said:
There you wrong in, all can be used as desktop operating system, the only difference is you probably use other apps for certain tasks.
So will you use iTunes for music on OSX, but in Linux you will use another app which offers same functionality.
Only thing what is still an fact is that Windows is better if you like use your pc for gaming, Linux does not have many games, osx is the same story but there are still more games for OSX then Linux.
I can name an list off app which you can use on all three.
Firefox
VMWare
Virtualbox
Skype
VLC
Chrome
Handbrake
Sabnzbd+
And for most Windows software you will find alternatives, but IM software can be sometimes an problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The main things I use Windows for are:
Visual Studio
Sony Acid
Sony Sound Forge
Adobe Creative Suite
None of them have suitable alternatives on Linux - not even close. Some of them will partially function under Wine but that's not enough.
There is definitely the argument that you do need Windows for some things, but I can't think of any reason why I need Linux over it. (I do use both - I have my PC dual boot Windows 7 and Ubuntu 11.)
In fact, you can't avoid any OS's
For .NET programmers, there is no other choice than to use Windows.
For Android ROM/Kernel compiling, then Linux is mandatory.
For iPhone app development (XCode?) then I guess Mac is mandatory.
I'm no fan off dual booting, because I have expensive GB's ( SSD's ). But yes sadly on video editing there is not any powerfull program for Linux.
But there are some opensource video editors which I think are not bad, maybe you never heard off the one I'm to name now.
http://www.kdenlive.org/
Video editor for Linux, I think its very good, don't know how far it is now but last time I used it was good for editing video.
I made this AMV with it in 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjgixJc-rE8
But it depends, sometime you really need Windows or OSX ( Just use osx86 ), but most times the average user does not need it.
Maybe i'll reinstall windows 7 or buy a mac. because i'm not the biggest linuxfan..
Sent from my MK16i using xda premium
Since when do people pay for windows!! :O looololololololol
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
kevin2516 said:
Since when do people pay for windows!! :O looololololololol
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do indirect because you get an license for Windows 7 home premium if you buy an notebook. An notebook without Windows on it would be more expensive for sure.
Linux die hards would want it without this license and apply for a refund, but honestly this time I choose not to do that and keep the license because I use Windows 7 now.
I got an refund from dell for Windows 7 home premium, but I could use the license afterwards still.
I think I would switch back to Win 7 instead.
W7 is most likely going to be the next XP, as in there are likely to be companies demanding it's availability in 10 years time.
I support several companies which insist on XP.
Every few years I dabble with Linux and I've yet to be impressed.
I dual boot with Ubuntu 11.10 and it has many failings over Windows.
Take support for Exchange, previous versions used Evolution but 11.10 comes with Thunderbird. Evolution is only good if you're not running anything newer than Exchange 2003, so while I can use it to access my personal email on my 2003 server, I can't connect to work as they use Exchange 2010.
Just been round a friend's house today and he's moved onto Ubuntu at home because he has to deal with Windows all day at work. Discovered that even though the screen had timed out (PC hadn't been touched for a couple of hours) he was able to open a terminal session before the screen then dimmed and locked, so great security there.
The title of this thread shouldn't be a question, it should be a statement aimed to persuade.
xaccers said:
W7 is most likely going to be the next XP, as in there are likely to be companies demanding it's availability in 10 years time.
I support several companies which insist on XP.
Every few years I dabble with Linux and I've yet to be impressed.
I dual boot with Ubuntu 11.10 and it has many failings over Windows.
Take support for Exchange, previous versions used Evolution but 11.10 comes with Thunderbird. Evolution is only good if you're not running anything newer than Exchange 2003, so while I can use it to access my personal email on my 2003 server, I can't connect to work as they use Exchange 2010.
Just been round a friend's house today and he's moved onto Ubuntu at home because he has to deal with Windows all day at work. Discovered that even though the screen had timed out (PC hadn't been touched for a couple of hours) he was able to open a terminal session before the screen then dimmed and locked, so great security there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exchange is something from Windows, ofcourse you have an chance with trouble if you use exchange on an non windows operating system.