Posts by Huw Evans

Listening to the customer

At last, it appears that Dell understands the concept of selling what the customer demands as opposed to pushing pointless bloat on them under the guise of 'progress' and 'improvement'.

Probably realised that more people are refusing to buy, and don't, want vista as it has become apparent on a large scale of how rubbish it is. I know, before I get flamed, that some people love it but all in all, it is not fit for purpose (flashy gimmicks and drm aside)

I had to use it on a 3 month old 'pc world' type of box, when a colleague had a problem and wanted to transfer data off the machine before selling it. I had no patience at all with the constant dialogue boxes, things not where they used to be and logically should be, stupidly slow file transfer, constant crashes, but all done in a graphically pretty way.I am in no way an IT expert but know quite a bit, having built and repaired pc's as a hobby and a necessity for the last 10 - 13 years (since win 95 ) but am at a loss of how this OS is supposed to be handled by the average email sending web browsing letter writing non-power user or enthusiast.

As no doubt many others have found out, it is unneccessary and wasteful so they are not buying it. It is nice to see that the message is finally getting through to the mostly arrogant vendors and manufacturers and here's hoping that they have enough balls to tell MS where the problem lies.

Final comment: don't tell me vista is popular because X million users have it. Most people have to pay tax, lots of people have cancer, both through not having a choice. It doesn't make ieither popular.

Crap

Just a few comments.

Disclaimer, I can't think of anything more crap than current 'music,' have no interest in american 'movies', have no interest in gaming or such activities so have no real interest in p2p per se.

I don't see how the self appointed arbiters of law, BT and BPI, are able to use this kind of monitoring to prevent file sharing on the flimsiest of evidence while letting people who are part of a known botnet keep using their account. If it's good enough for one perceived breach of law it should be good enough for all.

I partly concurr that the responsibility for securing a router should be the consumer, but the ISP should help by blocking / informing these compromised users. As they don't I can only assume that they are scared of losing income from these people. If so, why are they happy to lose file sharing customers ? How much, or what, are they getting in return from the BPI ?

Another thought for ISP's: I would think that quite a lot of customers are signing up for their expensive packages because they want to share files or download music / movies, utube etc. How will this type of ruling by an ISP affect their income stream? Do theyconsider that paying customers are secondary to the ridiculous demands of a dying industry that can't see where it's going wrong ?

Sorry, I can't understand the short sighted view taken by ISP's and the like in situations like this.