> I don't know about the rest of what he says, not having tried it yet, but:
I have been waiting for VPC 2007 to come out of beta (I heard from a colleague this morning it is now released, I have not checked). But an associate of mine went to a M$ sponsored seminar yesterday in Rochester, NY, and called me this morning with all the crapola being positioned as beneficial for all PC users by M$. Several of her questions re: migrating files with security settings from one HDD to another without losing said security settings were pooh-poohed, as were several other questions by she and several other folks amongst the almost 400 attendees. Although the presenters were linguistically polite, she told me the majority of answers were condescending (now, now, little girl, it really is good for you to not get a clear answer as that would involve deep complexities IN A ROOM FULL OF IT PROFESSIONALS!). And the matter of Vista being so protected it will not run without security warnings popping up, hence the practical need to disable said protections, was asked about. The answer was more political than technical, it was never answered, just danced around. For folks with compatibility issues the stock answer was to "simply" use VPC with an earlier OS (XP, 2000 Pro)! I wish I had gone. So, once I do get VPC 2007, and install Vista Ultimate, and provide 1.5Gb RAM to the VPC session, I will start testing my VFP and ProComm apps. And, if indeed there are issues I will need to see what happens when I compile them in VFP9 (I code in VFP9, but compile in VFP7). If they run okay then I guess I am going to have to force a run-time update from VFP7 to VFP9 on my End Users, or have a Vista and non-Vista version for folks. And, of course, if I can't get VFP compiled versions to run I will need to have my clients use VPC, with the additional RAM of course. Craziness. Oh, in the Register article Stephen Russell sent to us (see below), did y'all catch the deal where FireFox can't be made the default browser? Very clever. M$ allows other browsers to be used (maybe <g>), but only IE7 can be the default? Talk about slicing hairs... Technically compliant with the DOJ ruling, but virtually neutering FireFox, Opera, etc. from getting a firm displacement foothold in our browsing experience regardless of what the End User wants to use for a default browser. I hope I find this guy is all wrong in his findings, and my one colleague overstated her concerns after attending the M$ Vista seminar. Okay, back to other stuff... Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Bourke > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:25 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Vista, all it's CRAPPED up to be > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > <http://www.theregister.com/2007/02/14/pricey_beta_bugger/> > > > > I don't know about the rest of what he says, not having tried it yet, but: > > > Aero looks nearly as good as KDE, although it demands about three > times the system resources. > > That's a ridiculous statement. First, in no way does vanilla KDE look > anything like as good as Aero, although you can make it look that good. > Secondly, is the comparison of system resources between the > fundamentally different Linux and Windows architectures a valid one? I > don't think so. What system resources, anyway? > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
