I've ran Vista RC1 for months No Issues and Now got a Vista Ultimate Upgrade
to XP Sp2 Home I've Had nothing But Issues Windows stretched pulled and views
set. then few hours Later it changes next time I open the folder or window to
a certain Area

I Had Nothing but problems with the Final Windows Vista Build.
Although Minor and some Issues Bad Like one day after Months of Being
Activated I turned my computer on to watch Dream scenes preview and about of
other extras uninstall and Windows Vista went into a lock down state.
Because Activation Verification failed.

Took a New key and a Support call to fix that one.

My point is Windows Vista Over All is Junk.

Compare to another computer I'm running it's a 200mhz 768mbs of ram running
Windows XP Home sp2 with no Issues What So Ever

Also I've reported my Issues and not one Other than the Activation Issue
were resolved.

Windows/Folders View and Layout Defined by User and remembering these
settings and look of a folder or window is my #1 Issue.
But I still see 120 other reported & Known Un-resolved issues with Vista are
still there.

--
MikroXP, Beta Testing Fool & New Stuff Addict

"Mikro" <Mikro@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:329153DB-9A21-410D-838F-AF53F2826395@microsoft.com...[color=blue]
> I've ran Vista RC1 for months No Issues and Now got a Vista Ultimate
> Upgrade
> to XP Sp2 Home I've Had nothing But Issues Windows stretched pulled and
> views
> set. then few hours Later it changes next time I open the folder or window
> to
> a certain Area
>
> I Had Nothing but problems with the Final Windows Vista Build.
> Although Minor and some Issues Bad Like one day after Months of Being
> Activated I turned my computer on to watch Dream scenes preview and about
> of
> other extras uninstall and Windows Vista went into a lock down state.
> Because Activation Verification failed.
>
> Took a New key and a Support call to fix that one.
>
> My point is Windows Vista Over All is Junk.
>
> Compare to another computer I'm running it's a 200mhz 768mbs of ram
> running
> Windows XP Home sp2 with no Issues What So Ever
>
> Also I've reported my Issues and not one Other than the Activation Issue
> were resolved.
>
> Windows/Folders View and Layout Defined by User and remembering these
> settings and look of a folder or window is my #1 Issue.
> But I still see 120 other reported & Known Un-resolved issues with Vista
> are
> still there.
>
> --
> MikroXP, Beta Testing Fool & New Stuff Addict[/color]


Well, you seem as if you are the capable type, running betas 'n all, why not
clean install Vista?

Saucy

A clean install would have solved all your probs, instead of mucking around
with an upgrade.
You want us to think you are cluey; you should know upgrades are the rotten
way to go for ANY windows OS.
And you have read all the upgrade probs here! lol.

"Mikro" wrote:
[color=blue]
> I've ran Vista RC1 for months No Issues and Now got a Vista Ultimate Upgrade
> to XP Sp2 Home I've Had nothing But Issues Windows stretched pulled and views
> set. then few hours Later it changes next time I open the folder or window to
> a certain Area
>
> I Had Nothing but problems with the Final Windows Vista Build.
> Although Minor and some Issues Bad Like one day after Months of Being
> Activated I turned my computer on to watch Dream scenes preview and about of
> other extras uninstall and Windows Vista went into a lock down state.
> Because Activation Verification failed.
>
> Took a New key and a Support call to fix that one.
>
> My point is Windows Vista Over All is Junk.
>
> Compare to another computer I'm running it's a 200mhz 768mbs of ram running
> Windows XP Home sp2 with no Issues What So Ever
>
> Also I've reported my Issues and not one Other than the Activation Issue
> were resolved.
>
> Windows/Folders View and Layout Defined by User and remembering these
> settings and look of a folder or window is my #1 Issue.
> But I still see 120 other reported & Known Un-resolved issues with Vista are
> still there.
>
> --
> MikroXP, Beta Testing Fool & New Stuff Addict[/color]

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:36:02 -0700, Mick Murphy <Mick Murphy
@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> A clean install would have solved all your probs, instead of mucking around
> with an upgrade.
> You want us to think you are cluey; you should know upgrades are the rotten
> way to go for ANY windows OS.[/color]


That is completely false. Back in the days of Windows 9X it was often
true, but with modern versions of Windows, an upgrade replaces almost
everything anyway, and usually works very well.

Unless you are starting with a problem-ridden Windows installation,
it's almost always worth at least trying the upgrade. It usually saves
a lot of time as compared to a clean installation, and worst case, if
it doesn't work well, you can always do a clean installation.

My Vista installation here, which I have been running problem-free
since mid-November, was an upgrade from XP Professional.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:71aee3letf37vhm2004ie80h6el61dahgu@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:36:02 -0700, Mick Murphy <Mick Murphy
> @discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> A clean install would have solved all your probs, instead of mucking
>> around
>> with an upgrade.
>> You want us to think you are cluey; you should know upgrades are the
>> rotten
>> way to go for ANY windows OS.[/color]
>
>
> That is completely false. Back in the days of Windows 9X it was often
> true, but with modern versions of Windows, an upgrade replaces almost
> everything anyway, and usually works very well.
>
> Unless you are starting with a problem-ridden Windows installation,
> it's almost always worth at least trying the upgrade. It usually saves
> a lot of time as compared to a clean installation, and worst case, if
> it doesn't work well, you can always do a clean installation.
>
> My Vista installation here, which I have been running problem-free
> since mid-November, was an upgrade from XP Professional.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup[/color]


Ken,

I think the point is that the OP -did- try an upgrade and experienced
problems. While I am a staunch proponent of clean installs, your arguement
to try upgrades first, then a clean install, makes sense. Having
acknowledged that point, we're back to the issue at hand; the OP's upgrade
resulted in, what appears to be, a less than optimal system. Time to try the
clean install.

Lang

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:40:21 -0400, "Lang Murphy"
<lang_murphy********.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:71aee3letf37vhm2004ie80h6el61dahgu@4ax.com...[color=green]
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:36:02 -0700, Mick Murphy <Mick Murphy
> > @discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> A clean install would have solved all your probs, instead of mucking
> >> around
> >> with an upgrade.
> >> You want us to think you are cluey; you should know upgrades are the
> >> rotten
> >> way to go for ANY windows OS.[/color]
> >
> >
> > That is completely false. Back in the days of Windows 9X it was often
> > true, but with modern versions of Windows, an upgrade replaces almost
> > everything anyway, and usually works very well.
> >
> > Unless you are starting with a problem-ridden Windows installation,
> > it's almost always worth at least trying the upgrade. It usually saves
> > a lot of time as compared to a clean installation, and worst case, if
> > it doesn't work well, you can always do a clean installation.
> >
> > My Vista installation here, which I have been running problem-free
> > since mid-November, was an upgrade from XP Professional.
> >
> > --
> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup[/color]
>
>
> Ken,
>
> I think the point is that the OP -did- try an upgrade and experienced
> problems. While I am a staunch proponent of clean installs, your arguement
> to try upgrades first, then a clean install, makes sense. Having
> acknowledged that point, we're back to the issue at hand; the OP's upgrade
> resulted in, what appears to be, a less than optimal system. Time to try the
> clean install.[/color]



That's OK with me. If it's time to try a clean install, I have no
objection.

My post above was not in response to the OP's question (which I
actually had missed), but to the comment made by Mick Murphy, "you
should know upgrades are the rotten way to go for ANY windows OS." His
comment wasn't really in response to the OP's problem either, but was
made as a general statement. Since that general statement was
completely false, as far as I'm concerned, I thought it deserved a
rebuttal.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:r15he31l827cshmq03chjvgcqq390ps9f6@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:40:21 -0400, "Lang Murphy"
> <lang_murphy********.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.am.invalid.domain> wrote in message
>> news:71aee3letf37vhm2004ie80h6el61dahgu@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
>> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:36:02 -0700, Mick Murphy <Mick Murphy
>> > @discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> A clean install would have solved all your probs, instead of mucking
>> >> around
>> >> with an upgrade.
>> >> You want us to think you are cluey; you should know upgrades are the
>> >> rotten
>> >> way to go for ANY windows OS.
>> >
>> >
>> > That is completely false. Back in the days of Windows 9X it was often
>> > true, but with modern versions of Windows, an upgrade replaces almost
>> > everything anyway, and usually works very well.
>> >
>> > Unless you are starting with a problem-ridden Windows installation,
>> > it's almost always worth at least trying the upgrade. It usually saves
>> > a lot of time as compared to a clean installation, and worst case, if
>> > it doesn't work well, you can always do a clean installation.
>> >
>> > My Vista installation here, which I have been running problem-free
>> > since mid-November, was an upgrade from XP Professional.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
>> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup[/color]
>>
>>
>> Ken,
>>
>> I think the point is that the OP -did- try an upgrade and experienced
>> problems. While I am a staunch proponent of clean installs, your
>> arguement
>> to try upgrades first, then a clean install, makes sense. Having
>> acknowledged that point, we're back to the issue at hand; the OP's
>> upgrade
>> resulted in, what appears to be, a less than optimal system. Time to try
>> the
>> clean install.[/color]
>
>
>
> That's OK with me. If it's time to try a clean install, I have no
> objection.
>
> My post above was not in response to the OP's question (which I
> actually had missed), but to the comment made by Mick Murphy, "you
> should know upgrades are the rotten way to go for ANY windows OS." His
> comment wasn't really in response to the OP's problem either, but was
> made as a general statement. Since that general statement was
> completely false, as far as I'm concerned, I thought it deserved a
> rebuttal.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup[/color]


Roger that, Ken.

Lang