Shit that you come across daily that pisses you off

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware / Software Crap > Shit that you come across daily that pisses you off

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

AVG updating, because for some ungodly reason AVG downloading an update slows my computer to a crawl. Not even updating its files, no, just downloading poo poo from the server. Anything I'm doing, any game I'm playing, slows to a snail's pace for twenty/thirty seconds for AVG's sake. It doesn't matter how old or low taxing thing I'm doing, either- 2d 1994 X-com slows just as badly as Half-life 2. What the gently caress, Grisoft? Of course, it'll do the download without warning or attempting to steal focus, so I'll just randomly be getting in some mid-morning gaming and hit 2 FPS, and then when thats over and its installing the updates THEN it'll minimize my game and pop up an "OK, we're done" message.

The "Windows does not recognize this file extension." Screen, because it's 100% worthless, because only one of the two options it gives you is worth using- select the program you wish to use to open the file. Searching the internet for a program to use- opening up a Microsoft page on the extention- is always useless, ALWAYS. For some reason the MS website doesn't recognize jack poo poo.

3DS Max and Maya both requiring XP/Vista Pro.

loving Autodesk. I don't want a new goddamn OS!

Something I no longer deal with every day, but used to: Vista, and UAC. I used a Vista machine for about a month at the beginning of the year, and it was hell. I was having PSTD flashbacks to Windows ME from the shocking display of reduced usability and increase in annoyances. Even once I learned I could turn UAC off, just little things I took for granted in XP, like being able to browse my loving hard drive, was a trial, because they hid access to that. It didn't help that despite this being a $800 machine, Dell stuck a MOTHERFUCKING GEFORCE 6100 INTEGRATED CHIP IN IT WHAT THE loving gently caress DELL!?
It's pretty loving sad when a Pentium 4 2.66 Ghz, 1 GB, PCI Radeon 9250 computer on XP runs faster than a AMDx64 5000+, 2 GB RAM, Geforce 6100.

This was before SP1 for Vista of course, so things might just be different now v

v

Securom. I run Process Explorer, a Microsoft made program that functions as a Task Manager replacement (it's great, I recommend it, at the very least for the advantage of having programs and processes organized in parent trees and color coded, so you can easily spot when something's out of place), and it's blacklisted by Securom. Not only is it blacklisted, but Securom can detect if it was ever ran at all since the last reboot, even if its currently closed, and will refuse to let a game run. It's infuriating. Securom doesn't even come forward and say that Process Explorer is the issue. It just gives a generic error code and refuses to let the game play. It took multiple unfortunate uninformed game purchases before I learned the awful truth.

Luckily there's a brazen scofflaw community of ne'er-do-wells to help.

# ¿ May 20, 2008 00:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 24, 2013 04:25

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

Factor Mystic posted:

Seconding the 'people who hate Vista without a good reason' complaint and adding in 'People who compare Vista to ME'. BOY AREN'T YOU EDGY NEVER HEARD THAT ONE BEFORE.

Except I've used ME and Vista, and specifically laid out my issues in that post, and mentioned and quantified that this was early Vista, before SP1, and a lot of the smaller updates, so what's your point?

# ¿ May 20, 2008 01:05

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

JSW2 posted:

I don't play games so I don't know if this actually works (or even if it is what you're looking for), but according to Wikipedia, Microsoft has fixed the issue in the newer versions of Process Explorer.

Wikipedia

Thanks for this. I was under the impression that the v11 version of Process Explorer simply cut out the Google support and reworded the EULA and menus to make it a thoroughly MS product after they bought Systernals, and I thought that was just kinda petty so I never bothered upgrading.

# ¿ May 20, 2008 10:28

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

Erwin posted:

People who cling to Windows 2000 or whatever this guy is clinging to and refuse to 'upgrade' to XP. Welcome to 7 years after it was released.

XP Home. I went four years without discovering a single thing besides built-in remote desktop that was missing with Home before deciding to try out Max/maya. D:

# ¿ May 20, 2008 17:33

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

I wasn't aware there were any security or permission controls missing from Home.

(I only manage two computers, the two in my own household, so the things I need to configure and control are fairly limited in scope.)

# ¿ May 20, 2008 17:39

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

Erwin posted:

Oh. Still, you're spending how many thousands of dollars on the software, you can't part with a C-bill to go pro?

Not a cent. Maya Learning Edition is specifically what I wanted. 3Ds Max (which has a 30 day trial but nothing similar to the Maya learning edition) just happens to have those same requirements.
It's also more of an issue of how much a pain in the rear end it is/would be to switch OS's, and thus back up all my poo poo, clear a partition, install XP Pro, then reinstall all my programs and replace my files, for the sake of a single program. That falls under the category of things that piss ME off, personally.

Next computer build, I'm going for XP Pro x64.

# ¿ May 20, 2008 22:21

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

kapinga posted:

Why would you do this?

Because Survival Crisis Z doesn't work in Vista?

# ¿ May 20, 2008 23:12

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

John Dough posted:

Possibly, but you might want to consider using an OS that does not have almost nonexistant driver support.

x64, or XP?

FallenGod posted:

From googling that, I think Vista is doing you a favor.

SCZ is the greatest zombie game ever.

It's also not the only older program not be incompatible with Vista.
The difference between XP and Vista, if I take the reports of how SP1 has changed Vista for the better at face value, is so negligible for my needs at this point really that it really does come down to little things like that. Peer Guardian isn't Vista supported, either.

I'm intending to upgrade to Vista probably some time around Alan Wake's release, since, being published by MS, it's likely to be a Vista exclusive.

# ¿ May 20, 2008 23:41

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

Awesome Axe posted:

The thing is XP x64 is absolutely horrible, and you'll have more issues running that than you would running any other NT based OS.
Also if you really need to run certain programs under XP (like your little zombie game (btw there is a possible solution here - http://skasoftware.wordpress.com/20...games-on-vista/ ) then dual booting is really simple.
Just partition your drive, and install Vista to that new partition, and it should find XP and set up a boot menu for you.

I wasn't aware of XP x64 having issues like that. Guess I need to do a bit more research into OS's, I typically rely on word-of-mouth and friend recommendations and internet news, etc. My interest in XP x64 directly comes from a friend who uses it and couldn't have been more endorsing of it.

That's an awfully complicated fix. Maybe I'll give it an experimental try on the other PC in the house (which is the Vista (Home Premium) machine I was talking about earlier in the thread).

# ¿ May 21, 2008 00:36

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

hyperborean posted:

Not to say that UAC is bad, but this is something that I don't quite understand, maybe just cause I don't have Vista. Software authors should not require admin credentials to install, this is the purpose of UAC being 'annoying', is that correct?

If so, what does this help? What is to stop malware authors from also adhering to this installation model? Is it simply that malware by nature needs to put stuff in system folders, while legitimate programs should not need to do so?
Thanks.

Related, does adherence to this idea prevent software from putting itself in startup, dicking around with the registry, and so forth? If so, that's awesome. If not, I feel some of the point is lost.

The main point as far as I was aware is that the user typically runs as a normal user, only gaining per-program admin rights by UAC, which explicitly asks permission of the user first. So you can only give select things admin access. The protection against malware using UAC properly is that, AFAIK, you'd recognize this is not something you're installing or want and deny it admin access. A trojan or whatever that tricks the user into accepting it wouldn't be blocked.
The problem is that users will start accepting UAC automatically without looking or reading, because the loving thing pops up for nearly EVERYTHING.

# ¿ May 21, 2008 16:59

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

vlack posted:

I don't have Vista either, but this idea is what I hear a lot from the people who bash on UAC.

My question is, is UAC any worse than sudo? I use sudo all the time under my Linux, Mac OS X, and Solaris boxes. If I still used an XP Pro box regularly, I'd probably try to implement sudowin. If so, I don't see the big deal with UAC (besides perhaps the fact that it's apparently a lot less configurable than sudo), and I don't understand the slashdot hate for it.

Sudo is a conscious thing on the user's part. UAC is an automatic popup cleared just by clicking OK. You're not likely to type in the sudo command to install a spyware or virus unawares. You ARE likely, if you don't know or aren't paying attention, to click OK without looking to closely at the popup.

# ¿ May 21, 2008 17:59

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

kapinga posted:

Have either of you used Ubuntu much? Sure, when you are in the command line, you have to enter sudo before each explicit command, but in the GUI, the sudo elevation prompt shows up unrequested just the same as in Vista. There's some difference as to what actions need elevation between the two OSes, but I have not found UAC to be any more annoying than sudo in a desktop linux environment. Actually, I find typing in my password all the time to be more cumbersome than the UAC prompts - not that either bothers me.

I wasn't aware it had that feature.

I tried Ubuntu about a year and a half to two years ago. I had it for about a month and a half without really doing anything with it, then I upgraded my video card to a Radeon 9250 and suddenly Ubuntu wouldn't load anymore- it dropped me in a DOS-looking screen when I tried. I ended up uninstalling it (poorly, with results that had me freaking out for a while before I learned what a master boot record was and how to fix it with the windows CD) after that.

Also, at least when I used Vista, if you had a password on your windows login you'd need to enter it for UAC (I believe there was a setting to have it auto-fill in the password prompt, though, not exactly sure).

Jetsetlemming fucked around with this message at May 21, 2008 around 18:58

# ¿ May 21, 2008 18:56

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

One I was reminded of today: VLC is mostly great. It has codecs for almost everything.
However, for the poo poo it doesn't have a codec or proper support for, it won't go outside itself and see what you've got installed outside VLC, and either just fail to play it, or play the audio with no video, or something along those lines, so I'll have to break out WMP. The file type I run into for this most often is whatever the hell format FRAPS records in, and every once in a while I run into others.
It also has a pretty lovely way of handling playlists, but I don't mind that all too much, except when the playlist screen crashes or freezes VLC because I tried to open it too soon after loading up my music folder or something.

# ¿ May 22, 2008 15:49

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

I just updated AVG to 8.0, and now its tray icon is claiming its in an error status... because I dared to manually disable the link scanner and email scanner from the AVG menu.
This is annoying. Obviously if I didn't want it to be that way, AVG, I never would've done it.
Windows had this same behavior when I first disabled some components of its security setup like the firewall (most useless thing ever. Whenever I ran an online game for the first time it'll work absolutely fine, then I'll quit back to desktop finding a popup from the windows firewall claiming it had been blocking the game (which was running fine) and if I wanted to unblock it.), but that I could shut up about telling me that I did something it didn't agree with. I can't find any such option with AVG.

# ¿ May 23, 2008 14:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 24, 2013 04:25

Jetsetlemming: Dec 31, 2007; it didn't feel like trying hard after a while

-Dethstryk- posted:

Uninstall AVG and reinstall it like this:
code:
avg_free_stf_en_8_100a1295.exe /hide /no_welcome /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSurf /REMOVE_FEATURE fea_AVG_SafeSearch
Edit: Just noticed that you were removing the e-mail scanner as well, but I don't know what the switch is for that.

I'm not sure uninstalling, reinstalling, and rebooting is worth getting rid of that little error sign. :S

Erwin posted:

Ok, first of all, your spelling, punctuation, and capitalization skills need work. Second of all, don't start a CRT vs LCD argument. There may be some very narrow, specific reasons for a CRT to have an advantage over an LCD but yours is a retarded argument. This has been argued about plenty of times so just stop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfac...emitter_display

If it weren't for some lawsuit we would've started seeing these last year. Flatscreen displays like LCDs but with a pixel pattern and size like CRTs, with less power consumption than either.

# ¿ May 23, 2008 15:53

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware / Software Crap > Shit that you come across daily that pisses you off