Vista - they claim it was hardware problems.. YEAH RIGHT!

They blame the outages of the messenger service on hardware failures.. YEAH
RIGHT! Do you really believe them? I don't! lol

What did you expect them to say? The truth that it was WINDOWS SERVERS
problem? Are you nutts, that's bad publicity!

Companies are already avoiding vista as if it's the plague the last thing
they want is companies to avoid server 2008!

And after being kicked so many times for the worse version of all time (aka
vista) they don't really need the same negative truth out there about
windows server 2008.

A vista is always a vista even if you have 100 service packs or change a few
things and call it a server edition. Crap is always crap, and vista is
always a vista.

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message.

In news:48cb136c$1@xxxxxx-privat.org,
leapfrog vista <leapfrog@xxxxxx> typed:

I don't usually feed trolls but I know quite a few people who are happily
using Vista. I suspect that you've either not tried it for yourself or, if
you have, you've tried it on inferior hardware or the likes. All-in-all it
isn't a bad operating system. There is a bit too much eye candy for my own
personal taste but that is easy to change. Initially there were some issues
with buggy drivers and that's not the fault of Microsoft. Today the worst
problem seems to be OEMs stuffing way too much crap on new installs or them
trying to ship out Vista boxes with just a ½ GB of RAM.

--
Galen (Not Current MS-MVP)

My Geek Site: http://kgiii.info
Web Hosting: http://whathostingshould.be

"In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason
backwards. That is a very useful accomplishment, and a
very easy one, but people do not practise it much. In the every-day affairs
of life it is more useful to reason forwards, and so
the other comes to be neglected. There are fifty who can reason
synthetically for one who can reason analytically." - Sherlock
Holmes

Greetings,

In the past I know for a fact that some connectivity issues were caused by some networking
hardware (vendor doesn't matter).

Of course, to be fair, it would be nice to have some redundancy, but I must admit that the
reliability of Messenger prior to this week has been quite good of late (ie. past few years).

--
Jonathan Kay
Microsoft MVP - Windows Live Messenger
MSN Messenger/Windows Messenger
MessengerGeek Blog: http://www.messengergeek.com
Messenger Resources: http://messenger.jonathankay.com
(c) 2008 Jonathan Kay - If redistributing, you must include this signature or citation
--


"leapfrog vista" <leapfrog@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:48cb136c$1@xxxxxx-privat.org...

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 04:11:40 +0300, leapfrog vista wrote:
Actually, I do.
Which "Windows Servers" would those be? If you mean the Windows Live
Messenger servers, wouldn't a problem there also afflict uses of Windows
Live Messenger under Windows XP, Windows Me, and Windows 98?
Most companies avoiding the upgrade to Windows Vista are doing it for
reasons akin to my decision not to upgrade; use of older peripherals, whose
manufacturers are not providing Windows Vista support for the hardware. I've
got an HP DeskJet 820Cse printer, and an HP ScanJet 6300C; neither of which
is supported by HP for Windows Vista. So I can either pay MSFT for the
Windows Vista upgrade, *and* buy a new printer, and a new scanner (maybe
$387), or just leave things as they are now ($0).
I've set up three Windows Vista computers, so far, and the users aren't
complaining. Well, one did complain, but I changed the appearance, made it
look more like Windows XP, and I gave him a Desktop shortcut to a favorite
photo folder, which quelled his other complaint; a different appearance to
the folder layout in Windows Explorer.
However, it appears to me that "Vista" != "crap".

(If you aren't a *NIX geek, "!=" means, "does not equal".)

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

I say reason any way you like, and I suggest using all available paths of
reason, as long as that leads to higher and better understanding.

The vista coolaid fanboys seem unable to reason at all. They do what MS
tells them to, as if they are programmed little robots.



"Galen" <galennews@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eak3QTUFJHA.3488@xxxxxx

you don't understand. msn network is now a tool that everyone uses for work
also.
I don't care if its free or not, people rely on it to exchange information.

MS should have zero downtime ... that's zero.

They have had outages, and if you cant remember them I can, and its
unacceptable.

My theory is clear: They use bad server software, mainly windows2008 that is
actually similar to vista since they share much of the same code.

Then it's the bad architecture that is centralized... what happens if an
explosion takes out those servers? the world will remain offline with
messenger for weeks?

They should be decentralized and mirrored, and the best way to do this is
using a real server platform, mainly linux.. lol

But that would need another type of thinking that is not the "MS" way.
After all, MS failed putting hotmail on windows servers, and they went back
to linux.

Sorry, I wouldn't be complaining if vista was better, but its my disgust for
vista that makes me suspect that its windows 2008 servers fault... :-)



"Jonathan Kay [MVP]" <msnewsreplies@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eMDXPfUFJHA.6052@xxxxxx

>Which "Windows Servers" would those be?

the servers that host the software that handles the msn messaging

its centralized... when the server goes down, so does the msn network.

"N. Miller" <anonymous@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1ue928syu6brb$.dlg@xxxxxx

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 14:09:45 +0300, leapfrog vista wrote:
Your quoting technique is highly unorthodox. In any case, if the Windows
Live Messenger servers are down, *all* users, on all platforms, are
affected. The result would be a lot more complaints than I have seen,
recently. Including users on Windows XP (where I am still stuck), and even
Windows Me and Windows 98 (which, I believe, are stuck using older versions
of the MSN Messenger client, because the Windows Live Messenger client
requires Windows XP, or newer, to run). A much wider problem than mere
Windows Vista users.

Regarding corporate resistance to Windows Vista; it isn't just incompatible
peripherals. Some enterprises are using software applications which have
not, yet, been ported to Windows Vista. How is that Microsoft's fault?

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum