From a newsgroup far, far away:

User has problems with installing and updating Windows 7 (on two old,
ex-Vista, laptops).

A response:

> erase the HD's and install win10

Response to response:

> Replace a bad dream with a nightmare?

On 4/21/2022 8:24, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> From a newsgroup far, far away:
>
> User has problems with installing and updating Windows 7 (on two old,
> ex-Vista, laptops).
>
> A response:
>
>> erase the HD's and install win10
>
> Response to response:
>
>> Replace a bad dream with a nightmare?

LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several years.

On 4/21/2022 8:42 PM, Michael Trew scribbled:
> On 4/21/2022 8:24, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> From a newsgroup far, far away:
>>
>> User has problems with installing and updating Windows 7 (on two old,
>> ex-Vista, laptops).
>>
>> A response:
>>
>>> erase the HD's and install win10
>>
>> Response to response:
>>
>>> Replace a bad dream with a nightmare?
>
> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several years.
Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.

On 21 Apr 2022, Frank Slootweg wrote
(in article<t3rpdq.990.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>):

> From a newsgroup far, far away:
>
> User has problems with installing and updating Windows 7 (on two old,
> ex-Vista, laptops).
>
> A response:
>
> > erase the HD's and install win10

very bad idea on older hardware. Win 7, or Vista, or Ubuntu. Seriously, I’d
go with one of those three, probably Win 7. Of course, I do happen to have a
good license key for Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit hanging around. It’d be
interesting to see if it’d activate...
>
> Response to response:
>
> > Replace a bad dream with a nightmare?

Win 10 on Vista-era hardware would be... Not A Good Idea(™).

"tesla sTinker" <seaviews7@yahoo.com> wrote

| > LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
| > quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several
years.
| Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.

Liar is a strong word. It's marketing. Win95, 98,
and "millennium" were all v. 4. So what? Rumor was
that they kept v. 6 for Win7 to avoid problems. That
makes sense to me. A lot of software makes version
checks. If code was written to check for 6 and the
software wasn't updated, it might fail on Win7, even
thouh it's pretty much the same product as Vista.

The real lie was that with Vista they started making
the API call GetVersionEx lie. They didn't want people
to not support Vista, so the system lied about the version
and alleged compatibility code in Windows would make
up the difference! But of course that didn't work. So
programmers had to come up with tricks like checking
the kernel32 version in order to figure out what Windows
they were running on.

That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately designing
the Win32 API to lie to programmers.

On 5/8/2022 5:10 PM, Mayayana scribbled:
> "tesla sTinker"<seaviews7@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> |> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
> |> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several
> years.
> | Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.
>
> Liar is a strong word. It's marketing. Win95, 98,
> and "millennium" were all v. 4. So what? Rumor was
> that they kept v. 6 for Win7 to avoid problems. That
> makes sense to me. A lot of software makes version
> checks. If code was written to check for 6 and the
> software wasn't updated, it might fail on Win7, even
> thouh it's pretty much the same product as Vista.
>
> The real lie was that with Vista they started making
> the API call GetVersionEx lie. They didn't want people
> to not support Vista, so the system lied about the version
> and alleged compatibility code in Windows would make
> up the difference! But of course that didn't work. So
> programmers had to come up with tricks like checking
> the kernel32 version in order to figure out what Windows
> they were running on.
>

boy are u ever stupid. The computer is a machine. You cannot use more
than one identification name for one command. It simply screws up.
Its the same with the cpu. IF you punch in pie, it does not know how to
divide it, if the math is incorrect. Grow up, they fucked it up
Microsoft, and its time, you all get with it, and shut the dam thing off.

> That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately designing
> the Win32 API to lie to programmers.
>
>

On 5/8/2022 5:19 PM, tesla sTinker scribbled:
>
>
> On 5/8/2022 5:10 PM, Mayayana scribbled:
>> "tesla sTinker"<seaviews7@yahoo.com> wrote
>>
>> |> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
>> |> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several
>> years.
>> | Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.
>>
>> Liar is a strong word. It's marketing. Win95, 98,
>> and "millennium" were all v. 4. So what? Rumor was
>> that they kept v. 6 for Win7 to avoid problems. That
>> makes sense to me. A lot of software makes version
>> checks. If code was written to check for 6 and the
>> software wasn't updated, it might fail on Win7, even
>> thouh it's pretty much the same product as Vista.
>>
>> The real lie was that with Vista they started making
>> the API call GetVersionEx lie. They didn't want people
>> to not support Vista, so the system lied about the version
>> and alleged compatibility code in Windows would make
>> up the difference! But of course that didn't work. So
>> programmers had to come up with tricks like checking
>> the kernel32 version in order to figure out what Windows
>> they were running on.
>>
>
> boy are u ever stupid. The computer is a machine. You cannot use more
> than one identification name for one command. It simply screws up.
> Its the same with the cpu. IF you punch in pie, it does not know how to
> divide it, if the math is incorrect. Grow up, they fucked it up
> Microsoft, and its time, you all get with it, and shut the dam thing off.
>
>> That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately designing
>> the Win32 API to lie to programmers.
>>
>>
here is the real question, who do you hold responsible for this.????
They are already charging everyone out through the roof for all this
fuck up. MS, owe the gov, the gov owes you. The taxes on the pump have
to go. And people need to wake up for disobeying God. You cannot lie
to God, nor can you if you lie to the world.

On 5/8/2022 5:10 PM, Mayayana scribbled:
> "tesla sTinker"<seaviews7@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> |> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
> |> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several
> years.
> | Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.
>
> Liar is a strong word. It's marketing. Win95, 98,
> and "millennium" were all v. 4. So what? Rumor was
> that they kept v. 6 for Win7 to avoid problems. That
> makes sense to me. A lot of software makes version
> checks. If code was written to check for 6 and the
> software wasn't updated, it might fail on Win7, even
> thouh it's pretty much the same product as Vista.
>
> The real lie was that with Vista they started making
> the API call GetVersionEx lie. They didn't want people
> to not support Vista, so the system lied about the version
> and alleged compatibility code in Windows would make
> up the difference! But of course that didn't work. So
> programmers had to come up with tricks like checking
> the kernel32 version in order to figure out what Windows
> they were running on.
>
> That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately designing
> the Win32 API to lie to programmers.
>
>

Honestly, they have not repaired 6.1, why would you want windows 10 or
11. There are 12 apostles, not 11. go play games with names that are
not true, and you can expect the consequences. Gates should be
arrested, immediate by the fbi. Trump reinstated, and the key thrown
away until you figure out what to do about
his massive un fortune. I say, divide it up and give it back to the
people, same as with the gas tax. Gov has to act, or we will kick their
ass for it. This is the US Militia talking. They only have so much
time in congress, then the laser weapons fire off. Once that happens,
everyone can just forget it. they be dead meat.. trade towers fall,
God told you they would in the prophecy of Isaias. 911
Bush goes to hell. So do others. Good gov, should understand, they
have no tracking system for the stars. They cannot go unless they do,
even if they have the engine. It would be foolish, they would not come
back. There is no known technology to support such a system. Does this
mean the end of the world?

On 5/8/2022 5:10 PM, Mayayana scribbled:
> "tesla sTinker"<seaviews7@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> |> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
> |> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several
> years.
> | Windows 6.1 you mean.... Gates was always a liar.
>
> Liar is a strong word. It's marketing. Win95, 98,
> and "millennium" were all v. 4. So what? Rumor was
> that they kept v. 6 for Win7 to avoid problems. That
> makes sense to me. A lot of software makes version
> checks. If code was written to check for 6 and the
> software wasn't updated, it might fail on Win7, even
> thouh it's pretty much the same product as Vista.
>
> The real lie was that with Vista they started making
> the API call GetVersionEx lie. They didn't want people
> to not support Vista, so the system lied about the version
> and alleged compatibility code in Windows would make
> up the difference! But of course that didn't work. So
> programmers had to come up with tricks like checking
> the kernel32 version in order to figure out what Windows
> they were running on.
>
> That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately designing
> the Win32 API to lie to programmers.
>
>

its time, api, fuck api. I already have mine all fucked up. cannot run
the software with files that dissapear. Or did they. no they did not.
the dam op system cannot find them, rejects the whole api system of
dlls. It does. reinstall is what it says. Dont work. You can
reinstall until your blue in the face with the blue screen of death.
Fuck you Microsoft, i WANT alL MY MONEY BACK, INCLUDING, ALL THE
SOFTWARE THAT DOES NOT WORK. BECAUSE OF YOU. PAY UP ASS HOLE. nOT TO
MENTION, ALL MY SUFFERING AT THE SCREEN. tHATS A SHIT LOAD

On 4/21/2022 8:42 PM, Michael Trew scribbled:
> On 4/21/2022 8:24, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> From a newsgroup far, far away:
>>
>> User has problems with installing and updating Windows 7 (on two old,
>> ex-Vista, laptops).
>>
>> A response:
>>
>>> erase the HD's and install win10
>>
>> Response to response:
>>
>>> Replace a bad dream with a nightmare?
>
> LOL, in agreement; especially on older (former Vista) hardware. I'm
> quite happy with Windows 7, and I imagine that I will be for several years.
Mike, you have alot to learn. The whole setup is foul. It only works
on windows 3.1. That is the only op system Windows ever made, where the
commands are the same named,.....

Mayayana,

> That was the beginning of the end: Deliberately
> designing the Win32 API to lie to programmers.

:-) They just repeated what they had done before : DOS also suffered from
the same, in so much that there where actually *two* "commands" to retrieve
the version. INT 21h, AH=30h (get DOS version), and the DOS 5+ INT 21h,
AX=3306 (get true version number). They also provided the SETVER program to
make the first one return whatever you wanted.

And in regard to Windows ? I found a number of functions in earlier Windows
OS provided DLLs (IIRC Kernel32, Win 95, 98se) which where just dummies,
giving a fixed return/error value. Was fun when I ran into them and
couldn't figure out what was wrong with my program.

No, nothing new under the sun I'm afraid. :-|

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

tesla sTinker.

> boy are u ever stupid. The computer is a machine. You cannot use more
> than one identification name for one command. It simply screws
> up.

Lol. Kid, when you want to troll you need to pick your audience carefully.
Mayayana there knows a thing or two about computers (and programming), and
will most likely just chuckle at your attempt.

But for the off chance you are not, look up the commands "MD" and "MKDIR".
Or "CD" and "CHDIR". Just to name two.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser