Templot Club Archive 2007-2020                            < back - search archive  browse archive images

I know I shall have to get a Vista computer eventually to test and fine-tune Templot, but I was hoping to wait until the initial bugs in Vista have been fixed.

Dear all,

I'm desperately trying not to have to buy Windows Vista (), but I need some help. Initially there were several reports of Templot running fine on Vista. But recently I have had some reports of problems, and reading the Vista docs it seems that I ought to be making some changes to the installer program.

So I would be grateful for some feedback.

Are you using Templot on Vista? If so, any problems? Which version of Templot are you using? Did you install 074b first and then a later Pug, or did you just install the Pug and create your own shortcuts? Do any strange messages appear from Windows or Microsoft while using Templot? Does the "restore previous session" function work ok on startup?

Assuming you are not using 091a (if so please upgrade to 091b), have you had any difficulty saving files to the default location ( C:TEMPLOTBOX-FILES )? Or does the Save dialog insist on using only My Documents instead?

I know I shall have to get a Vista computer eventually to test and fine-tune Templot, but I was hoping to wait until the initial bugs in Vista have been fixed.

Many thanks for your help.

regards,

Martin.

>Is this supposed to be a step forward ?

Yes.

>What's wrong with what everyone's being doing up to and including XP - just double-click and install. 

Because it doesn’t work...

>If Vista really is that fussy about how you install things, then I'm not surprised people are having problems with it.

It’s not fussy, it’s just a different way of doing things.  The only people having problems are those that don’t know what they’re doing.  (To be honest though Vista does, of course, have its problems like any other product.  However, it really is a step forward for most users.)

I don’t know if you own a petrol car Paul, but if you do, are you still putting leaded fuel in it?

Brian

ps.  I can understand why you feel so at home in the Scalefour Society...

 

If Vista really is that fussy about how you install things, then I'm not surprised people are having problems with it.

It’s not fussy, it’s just a different way of doing things.  The only people having problems are those that don’t know what they’re doing.  (To be honest though Vista does, of course, have its problems like any other product.  However, it really is a step forward for most users.)

>Also there are no problem keeping 'Users Account' switched off, if you have a good 3rd party security program installed. If a hacker really wants access to a computer,he/she will find a way......they seems to be always a step ahead of the software producers


Well..... precisely.  You have just made the perfect argument for keeping the UAC switched on.  As you noted above, at some time a virus *will* get in.  The UAC is not a virus checker or Firewall.  What it does do is to stop the virus from launching a programme to screw up your system.  In the past, when the virus got in it was too late to stop it and you normally only found out when the damage was done.  All sounds very sensible to me...

>PS: The Beta of service pack1 is already out,the final edition will be on the market around Jan 2008(as per info from computer magazines).


At the present time the beta is only legally available to accredited testers.  Just as well really, as the release is causing DNS errors which must be fixed before the GA release.  This may or may not be in January.

Brian

>Maybe Microsoft should work on incorporating the changes in operation in the install routines.  If there's a danger of people not knowing what they are doing,  then try and prevent it.


Hi Jim.  I understand what you are saying but this is really only possible if the OS only allowed Microsoft applications to be installed.  (Now that would certainly get the EU bureaucrats foaming at the mouth! )  Other software vendors could create foolproof installation routines but most don’t give a damn.  (Vista has hardly crept up on the industry being circa seven years late but look at the number of missing or crap device drivers.)
>I don't know what kind of vehicle Paul drives,  but you should maybe note that cars requiring unleaded fuel had restricted diameter filler pipes so that only unleaded pump nozzles would fit - a simple protection in case people made a mistake while refuelling.  Maybe Microsoft should take note and do something similar with Vista :-)

 

I believe this is why the new Microsoft keyboards have smaller keys that are closer together ;-)

Brian (Who had better stop going off topic lest he incur the wrath of Martin...)

Brian,you made a good point there about keeping the UAC switched on,but it's more like a extra security function in case the Antivirus program fails to catch the intruder.

Jim Guthrie wrote:

I believe this is why the new Microsoft keyboards have smaller keys that are closer together ;-)

Brian (Who had better stop going off topic lest he incur the wrath of Martin...)

I've also installed Trax (it gives the logic for signal and turnout operation), again no problem.

Thanks for all the feedback about Vista. It does seem to illustrate the horror stories about Vista -- there might be a way to get things to work, but users either don't understand the process or by luck just happen to be using the right settings. Or not.

They claim to their customers the alternative is to buy new licensed XP CD.  If they have not already got one. What a let down for this manufacturer. Buy this computer but do not forget to allow another US$ 200 on the side for alternative OS.

----- from Nigel Brown -----

Max wrote:

Brian,you made a good point there about keeping the UAC switched on,but it's more like a extra security function in case the Antivirus program fails to catch the intruder.

At the moment moving to Vista is just a thought floating round the back of my mind, but from the comments on this web site it appears that Windows is at last growing up. Other better constructed OS's have long used an architecture which rigorously enforces a separation between user and administrator modes (linux/unix being just one (or two) popular example(s)), one which protects the system as a whole from being damaged when normal (user) mode is in operation, whether from errors in software or maliciously from viruses. This is the main reason why other OS's are much more secure from virus attack.

Not really true, Mac OS is underpinned by BSD Unix but Apple have taken a decision to never force the use of "admin" mode. Most users just use their default password to administer the machine (to install apps for example). It's done in a seamless way, probably because there is no vested interest in selling Microsoft Certified Admin training?

----- from Nigel Brown -----

Rextanka wrote:

Not really true, Mac OS is underpinned by BSD Unix but Apple have taken a decision to never force the use of "admin" mode. Most users just use their default password to administer the machine (to install apps for example). It's done in a seamless way, probably because there is no vested interest in selling Microsoft Certified Admin training?

Hi Nick

Of course you CAN use any unix/linux system as root, much the same as you can run any system without virus protection (I know, I did quite happily for 7 years until I made a mistake... now I use the free version of AVG, which does everything I need with minimum fuss).

I don't know what kind of vehicle Paul drives,  but you should maybe note that cars requiring unleaded fuel had restricted diameter filler pipes so that only unleaded pump nozzles would fit - a simple protection in case people made a mistake while refuelling.  Maybe Microsoft should take note and do something similar with Vista :-)

Jim.