| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 73162 | 2006-10-09 06:42:00 | What's your most annoying program? | Shortcircuit (1666) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 490340 | 2006-10-10 21:34:00 | Most Annoying program - it hurts me to have to say it but Nortons Doctor - if I remember rightly it was in my Win95 days - the darn thing worked up to a point but caused a lot more problems than it solved. A pity because when still using DOS I used Nortons all the time and reckoned it was the best program around. Another annoying program was the integrated program which came with my first computer, It was called ABLE, and was supposed to be a word processor - database - spreadsheet all in one. It did in fact do just about everything but badly. Particularly the database. It was known in the trade as DISABLE! I reckon today's users don't realise just how lucky they are. Hands up those who remember working in DANCAD 3D - I did and produced all the drawing I needed for the school I worked at for several years. And I didn't have a mouse - all lines were produced by commands. Ugh!! Mind you I am now "trying" to learn TURBOCAD. I must be mad seeing that I have been retired for 10years and have no requirement for it. Tom |
Thomas01 (317) | ||
| 490341 | 2006-10-10 21:56:00 | It's not Windows - not by itself. But the design decision in Windows that allows any vendor who thinks it is a good idea to have their app sit in systray and soak up resources, hijack other functionality and try to 2nd guess what you want to do -- that is the most annoying thing ever for me. If MS would do one thing that could make its OS better, it would be to give back total control to the user. So no install proceedure would be able to drop apps into systray and startup without your permission to do so. Just check what system process are running at any given time and work out how much resources you are losing to programs that you are not using and which got loaded into memory without you knowing, just because the vendor thinks it is a good idea to soak up 4MB of RAM with a pre-loader app that makes the main app load 5 seconds quicker (even thought you only use it once in a blue moon). Even worse is those apps that when you unisntall them, do not remove these traces. I've gone into system resources multiple times to find RAM being soaked up by the vestiges of programs I had supposedly un-installed. And then there are those helpful little apps that think they know what it is you want to do when you plug in an external device -- DVD drive, USB stick -- and so pop up to "help" you. AAAArrrrggghhhhh! All of this could be fixed if MS would just make the mental step to believing that the user, not the software vendor, should be making decisions about what software runs on their PCs. |
Biggles (121) | ||
| 490342 | 2006-10-10 22:55:00 | letting a user decide what to let run on their computer would be a 'giant leap for mankind' and I'm sure Microsoft will 'get with the program' (sic) real soon.... maybe when the next OS after Vista arrives in about 2025 :D | Shortcircuit (1666) | ||
| 490343 | 2006-10-10 23:16:00 | MS ActiveX update that can't be uninstalled. Can't run PC Pitstop anymore! |
Chris Randal (521) | ||
| 490344 | 2006-10-10 23:47:00 | letting a user decide what to let run on their computer would be a 'giant leap for mankind' and I'm sure Microsoft will 'get with the program' (sic) real soon . . . . maybe when the next OS after Vista arrives in about 2025 :D I agree with you and Bruce - letting the user run their own computer is definitely the best way forward . First, lets just get rid of all these people who don't know how to run a VCR, let alone a computer . . . :rolleyes: I was talking to someone about this the other day - the major market for computers is not people who read PC magazines, but the joe bloggs on the street who thinks the CPU or hard drive is the beige (or black) box sitting on the desk, and who doesn't understand the difference between download and upload (as in " I just downloaded an email to you") . It's the same reason the Xbox was created - why else would someone pay for a computer that is effectively frozen in time (technologically), if it wasn't for the fact that most people don't know, and don't care about, how to replace their graphics card, or put in a new hard drive, etc . The Xbox is a run-out-of-box computer with 3-4 year old (possibly older) componentry which joe bloggs thinks is state of the art . Windows without pop-ups and "helpful" boxes, and icons everywhere would be impregnable for most of the computer market . Those people who don't need it, or find it frustrating will have to accept that a mass-market product like windows will always try to accomodate the lowest common denominator . Take a look at the people around you - now that's a scary thought . . . FWIW - I vote for MS Word as the most frustrating program . Damn text boxes . . . :angry |
Lizard (2409) | ||
| 490345 | 2006-10-11 01:12:00 | Windows without pop-ups and "helpful" boxes, and icons everywhere would be impregnable for most of the computer market. Those people who don't need it, or find it frustrating will have to accept that a mass-market product like windows will always try to accomodate the lowest common denominator. Take a look at the people around you - now that's a scary thought... I'm all for Windows being simple to use. It needs to be simpler. That doesn't mean it shouldn't have depth and configurability for the power user, but it shouldn't confuse your mather-in-law either. Which is why I hate this apsect of Windows, the fact that stuff gets stashed away and loaded into RAM without you having control. It shoud be part of Windows that no app NEEDS to put stuff in systray or load up at start-up to do its job (with the exception of security apps), and that during install, an app tells you if it wants to put stuff in systray and gives you the option to opt out. Windows DOES NOT try to accomodate the lowest common denominator -- it just like to pretend that it does. If it was accomodating the lowest common denominator, it would not let third-party vendors mess things up for the user, and would require a robust system of verifying all install proceedures so that the user knows what ha sbeen installed and why. |
Biggles (121) | ||
| 490346 | 2006-10-11 04:38:00 | in order of annoyance: quicktime, realplayer, norton, any dlownload for a program installer which is reallyjust another download program, IE, itunes, and THAT BLOODY 1.5GB OF HP BUDLED CRAP THAT CAME WITH THAT PIECE OF **** "ALL IN ONE" PRINTER SCANNER HP THING WHEN IT WAS INSTALLING "DRIVERS", and finally, xp | motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 490347 | 2006-10-12 04:53:00 | I cannot understand why anyone would say that Norton (Symantec) is their most annoying program because whilst I may well agree with what their complaints are, surely a program can only be annoying if you are actually running it ?? ---- If like me you do not like Norton you uninstall it, then it is not annoying anymore. The original question refers to "is", the present tense ! ;) Now Quicktime is different because it sometimes come bundled with another program, then you might find it annoying but want to keep the main program more than you want to get rid of Quicktime. :yuck: I agree that Incredimail is annoying because you keep getting it in mail from other people. You might not want to upset them but get frustrated by seeing the results. :groan: Misty :) |
Misty (368) | ||
| 490348 | 2006-10-12 07:44:00 | I agree. bundling iTunes (which I find a piece of ****) with quicktime (which I find actually useful) was very annoying, until I found one could just extract separately the 2 installers from the 1 package. Still doesn't help if you have a slow internet connection. | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 490349 | 2006-10-12 07:56:00 | I agree. bundling iTunes (which I find a piece of ****) Hey, I love iTunes Misty :dogeye: |
Misty (368) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||