Free Kaspersky software

[gcol]

You clearly will not provide the evidence of the "fact" you say is a fact. You say it's a fact... prove it. It's not down to me to prove you right or wrong.
All this started because I said I'd had problems with Kaspersky on Vista but not on XP and you leap on the word VISTA and make it a hate campaign.
The reason I haven't upgraded to Vista for work is because it's not up to me.
You complain about having to disable things you don't like in Vista (although it takes only about 10 seconds), yet you think it ok to go to the trouble of adding things to XP to make it have some of the features of Vista.
I've known your posts for too long to know that we'll never agree on this so I guess we'll just have to accept we have differing opinions.

 

[Softus]

You clearly will not provide the evidence of the "fact" you say is a fact.

That's right. I refuse to be browbeaten into providing something that you yourself could obtain.

You say it's a fact... prove it.

Thank you for the offer, but I choose to decline.

It's not down to me to prove you right or wrong.

I'm happy for you to believe that I'm right, and equally happy for you to believe that I'm wrong.

I'm right, BTW.

All this started because I said I'd had problems with Kaspersky on Vista but not on XP and you leap on the word VISTA and make it a hate campaign.

My response was whimsical, not borne out of any malice towards anyone. You're the one who started getting uppity about it.

The reason I haven't upgraded to Vista for work is because it's not up to me.

OK.

You complain about having to disable things you don't like in Vista (although it takes only about 10 seconds)

It isn't me who doesn't "like it" - I don't have a personal opinion about how nice or horrible it is, for example. My view is based on the number of calls for assistance my business gets from people who are flummoxed by the unnecessary changes and unnecessary 'features' of Vista.

....yet you think it ok to go to the trouble of adding things to XP to make it have some of the features of Vista.

One thing. I pointed out that you could add one thing to XP, to address the thing that you claim is much improved in Vista.

I've known your posts for too long to know that we'll never agree on this so I guess we'll just have to accept we have differing opinions.

OK.

Time will tell. When Vista has been around as long as XP already has, we'll know how reliable it was, how well it coped with evolving processor families, how successfully the service packs rolled out, how many copies were sold, and how quickly it became obsolete.

XP has been around since 2000, and at seven years (up to the release of Vista) is the longest-running MS OS (so far). It merged the usefulness of the W98 GUI with the solid kernel of the WNT family, and with its two editions it supported, and continues to support, both home and business users. From the outset it was compatible with more hardware drivers and software products than any previous platform, and was instantly more reliable.

Vista, by comparison, is disappointing to many, and pointless to most.

Microsoft has already produced a Beta of Windows 7, and is bringing forward the release date from 2010 to 2009, which will make the lifetime of Vista merely two years. That's TWO YEARS.

 

[gcol]

Bookmark this post and feel free to rub my nose in it in 2 YEARS time.

 

[Softus]

Not my style, gcol.

BTW, it's only one year until 2009.