(Another double feature!)

Part I: Top ten reasons why Dial-a-fix doesn't support Vista yet

10. Vista sucks
9. Vista sucks
8. Vista sucks
7. Vista sucks
6. Vista sucks
5. I don't have very much personal time available to me these days.
4. I don't have any spare computers with which I could run Vista at the moment.
3. I use Borland Delphi which is fucking terrible, and I haven't been able to get back to my C studies for several months now. Object Pascal (as a language) is kick-ass (in my opinion), but Borland's IDE is complete garbage - especially its cost. Don't suggest .NET... that's not even funny.
2. Microsoft changed nearly everything Dial-a-fix is capable of fixing to the point that Dial-a-fix has to be rewritten from the ground up just for Vista. Nobody's really got lists of "common" fixes the way XP has. Dial-a-fix is just a collection of known fixes, anyway - 99% of what DAF does is not even my invention.
1. Microsoft should fix their shit so Dial-a-fix need not exist. Is it too much to ask for a brand new operating system version not to bring 7 years worth of bugs with it? Basically, #1 is that I can't currently be arsed to fix their brand new old bugs - that's their fucking job!

Everyone should petition Microsoft to get their shit together. How can this stuff happen so much to so many people that a program like Dial-a-fix needs to be made? If I can do it, why can't Microsoft?

I will probably make a Vista version, but don't ride my ass about when and where.

Vista is an abomination and it just goes to show you that even if you "listen" to your customers (by way of usability tests, etc) it doesn't guarantee you'll get the implementation right. Microsoft needs to go back to the basics and re-think the way people use computers. Most people are multitasking, non-deterministic users. Some are single-tasking deterministic users who have old habits that are hard to break. Tough for you folks - you'll need to renew your computing license. One of the problems I see in Vista is that it tried to simultaneously retain backward compatibility while moving forward. The result: a train wreck. You know who doesn't care AT ALL about your previous programs working? Apple. They couldn't give less of a flying double monkey fuck about your programs working in the next version. You know what else? This seems to be perfectly acceptable behavior in the Mac community. Why isn't anyone up in arms about how Apple constantly ditches everyone, each time a major OS release is made? At least Microsoft tries (even if they inevitably fail).

Part II: Mac zealotry

Don't even get me started about Mac zealotry (too late). Some (but not most) Mac users have serious mental issues and honestly believe that Apple computers are somehow special or better than PCs. I have news for you: they suck exactly as much as PCs - no more, no less. They fail too, and often in the same ways as PCs. Sure, there aren't any major viruses going around, but that's because people with virus programming skill are usually in it for the money, and are too skilled to waste their time on 1% of 1% of the computing population. (It might even be embarrassing to them to some degree.)

Apple almost had it right except that they've spent a lot of their time and money mocking Microsoft Windows and not a whole lot of time developing a better computing attitude and environment and moving forward with technology. So what if you're some hipster/yankee twentysomething who buys vendor-locked brand name computers at ridiculously inflated prices to use most of the same programs that are available for Windows? Sure, sometimes it's not the exact same program, but with so many choices available, there has to be something for Windows that does the same thing as what you're trying to accomplish on a Mac. There's a lot more freeware on the PC than there is on a Mac, too.

Most of the time they mock PCs for the wrong reasons. PCs don't get viruses, Windows does. PCs don't need major overhauls to upgrade operating system software - Windows does. A PC is just some hardware. Everything after that is up to the operating system, of which there are many available. It's just unfortunate for all of us that Microsoft won that war before the war really began.

You know the Mac guy on the PC versus Mac commercials? That guy is more smug than a motherfucker. Meanwhile, the PC guy is hilarious and has a nerdy charm to him. The Mac guy is a huge douche about everything, constantly mocking the poor PC's troubles, ignoring the fact that he has his own, as well as the fact that he lives in his mom's basement smoking pot all the time and needs to shave, get some respectable clothes, and get a fucking job.

I digress.

You basically bought a PC with different software on it. You have what kind of processor and motherboard (I'm sorry - "logic board")? Oh right, Intel. What kind of power supplies are used in Macs? ATX and BTX. What kind of hard drive? Seagate. Congratulations: you bought the most proprietary PC possible that still contains nothing but regular modular PC parts (excluding the motherboard's design and firmware). At least it can run Windows, I guess. I'm not sure if that's a pro or a con.

I've started Dial-a-fix over and here is what I have so far:

daftest (1)

daftest (2)

daftest (3)

daftest (4)

daftest (5)


As you can see it's mostly empty (for now) but there are great plans.
Currently, the "Scan" button on the "Find issues" tab looks for over 40 separate problems relating to the registry, services/drivers, shell/Explorer.exe, and Internet Explorer. It also displays restrictive policies.

It's written in Delphi and coming along nicely. A few rules lists will be moved to outside of the program .exe for easier access (such as restrictive policies). It will support languages. It will support Vista, Server 2003, and XP Pro x64. It will still support Windows 98. You can even resize or maximize the window now.

I spent all weekend working on it, and I plan to spend all of next weekend working on it as well. I have a lot of work to do but I'll keep everyone posted.

I was going to edit the previous post, but making a new post will bump everyone's RSS, etc, so I am just making this stub to paste the URLs for each hour:
* 06/15/07 - Hour 1
* 06/15/07 - Hour 2

Don't forget about FREE Dial-a-fix support at Lunarsoft.net! Even if I'm too busy to be around, the regulars there know Dial-a-fix better than anyone and can definitely lead you in the right direction. Also, they'll help you with general computer/tech support problems too, not just with Dial-a-fix.

Brad B. at Digital Doctors has been running Vista for about a week now. He had issues with his Soundblaster Audigy card and its drivers, so he decided to remove the card and simply use onboard (since it's close enough).

After doing so, Vista claimed that he had made a major hardware change and that he needed to activate again. He didn't have a good feeling about it, but he said OK and attempted to activate online. Denied. Then, he called the automated activation line. Phone activation also failed. He was transferred to a human.

The rep couldn't activate it either. The rep said that he would have to pay $59 to activate Vista again. What? He's only had Vista for a week!

After several expletives from Brad, the rep attempted to get a supervisor. A supervisor was nowhere to be found.

Finally, a three-way call was performed and forced activation was attempted. Denied again. In the end, a supervisor was finally found and Brad is now activated again.

Ugh.

Ah, I see that Vista's preview handlers crash twice as often as XP's shmedia and shimgvw handlers.

If you open a folder full of movies and pictures, you can almost guarantee COM Surrogate will crash constantly until it gets through every file you have (and it trudges through every subdirectory to do so).

In Explorer, click Organize > Folder and Search Options (or Tools > Folder Options), then go to the View tab. Checkmark Always show icons, never thumbnails.

Edit: As Simon has pointed out in the comments below, the main cause is usually third-party software (of which I was afflicted when I wrote this post). I'm sure one of those retarded codec packs causes it for most people (dear god people, stop using codec packs and just get VLC Player).

Simon Zerafa stated:

The main culprit seems to be older versions of Nero (the Vista Upgrade advisor flags these as incompatible with Vista) and DivX players.

It seems to be caused by third party players and applications that patch those functions in XP / Vista to allow previews in Explorer.

Updating the affected software to Vista compatible versions seem to be the best course of action. Failing that, find Vista-compatible alternatives.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000778.html

I fixed my first Vista problem last week. My boss brought in his Vista RC1 machine and it was acting oddly. Explorer.exe would take 50% CPU usage (two core CPU) and the Start Menu's pin list wouldn't show up at all. Everything else was working properly (including the All Programs list, and other functions of the Start Menu).

I had to find out whether the pin list problem was the cause or the effect, so I began searching the internet for the location of the pin list. It's nearly impossible to find this information.

After a half hour of digging around with Sysinternals Filemon and Regmon, I wasn't getting anywhere. I used Sysinternals strings.exe on shell32.dll (which I had previously discovered is where the pin list code is stored) and finally found out where the pin list is stored: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\StartPage
The value Favorites contains the pin list itself. I found that on this Vista machine, there was nothing wrong with the Favorites value. It was the ProgramsCache value that had become corrupted. After deleting the key and restarting Explorer, the pin list came back up and all of the CPU usage went away. Problem solved. (This all works the same in Windows XP.)

Sophos is recommending that system administrators ask their security vendors if they are capable of properly protecting them on the forthcoming 64-bit version of Vista, as arguments continue regarding access to Microsoft's operating system code (kernel). Sophos has reassured its customers that Sophos Anti-Virus will offer full protection against malware threats on Vista, and suggests that some security vendors may not have given sufficient thought to the new operating system when developing their products.

Anti-virus firms Symantec and McAfee have recently made high-profile complaints that they are being "locked out" of the Vista operating system kernel by Microsoft's PatchGuard prevention system. They argue that this is preventing them from continuing to develop pro-active protection against new malware, sometimes referred to as 'host intrusion prevention' or 'HIPS'. They claim this action is anti-competitive.

However, Sophos argues that its approach to HIPS technology has met with no problems on both the low-spec and high-spec versions of Windows Vista. In addition, Sophos claims that Microsoft has so far provided all the interfaces that Sophos needs for providing this form of protection.

More...

The final release of IE7 is fast approaching … and I mean really fast … and will be delivered to customers via Automatic Updates a few weeks after it’s available for download.

Hmmm, getting Internet Explorer 7 through Automatic Update will confuse lots of people with average and less than average computing skills. And is it already perfect?

Edit: You could however opt to disable the automatic delivery of IE7 as a high-priority update via Automatic Updates and the Windows Update and Microsoft Update sites. See here how to download a toolkit.

http://www.windows-noob.com/review/ie7/

Next Page →