I used Add/Remove Windows Components to delete Messenger. Then I ran Norton Syswrks 2003 'Windoctor'. Rebooted, and the freakin' bastard's BACK!!!!!!!!!

Wonder what the D.O.J. will have to say about this?

}---:?

The DOJ won't say anything. After the Bush administration took office, the DOJ was immediately ordered to drop all pressure on M$. The only pressure on M$ right now is the pending law suites by 9 states Attourney Generals. Also, there is an additional large legal action being developed by other states right now because of damages they feel that M$ has done thru their underhanded business practices.

DOJ, though? Forget it, their hands have been tied by their bosses - Donald Rumsfield and friends.



Last edited by Woogieman at Today at 6:35 am

Hey tubebuoy,

Technically, you did not uninstall/remove Messenger. All you actually did, and what M$ set up was a way for you to "hide" the programs... Makes no sense to me, but that's what they did... But if that is what they needed to do to comply with the demands of the States... that's what they did and nothing more... :blink:

Just saw this post by Fisher, there is a utility that will remove Messenger for you (without having to go through the registry yourself to rid yourself of the pesty prog)... He posted this URL: hxxp://www.majorgeeks.com/getfile.php?site=2&file=2327&gfile=yes Check it out if you want to remove Messenger. There are also other ways to prevent Messenger from ever being used, I think it was through the Policy Editor... Don't remember how I did it, but would be more than willing to find it if you want me to. Let me know.

-SlickVic78



Last edited by SlickVic78 at Today at 2:35 pm

Yeah. That's all the new feature does is "hide". And whoopie for Willie. He's got a buddy in the White House. Great!

here's a quick solution to all your problems ... reformat and intall linux and all your MS problems will disappear. :blink:

I cannot fathom why people who use MS software complain more than the Linux crowd ... either support it or move to the supposed better alternative. I feel like i'm the only one in the universe that has had no troubles with MS software cuz basically ... i've never run into any of these problems. Plus, with the whole Doj fiasco ... all that was asked from MS was to switch off certain apps so that the user can use third party software ... which MS did. If after using a norton app, MS messenger pops up again ... well that's something norton's caused not MS. So that you know, nothing that was originally installed as part of Xp can be deleted by you the user. I'm sure MS is capable of doing this but why should they, and in the case that you really want it off you sys ... you can use third party software to physically remove it. Plus it is MS's software ... why should they even think of unistalling apps that they themselves created for their OS. Here's the scenario ... as impossible or as stupid as it sounds ... bear with me for the sake of it. It's like this, you take in someone who pays you a good sum of rent each month ... he slowly becomes to comfortable and begins to use areas that should be out of bounds ... though you have never stipulated this to him. One day he decides that he doesn't like your furniture, and then goes as far as getting rid of it because he can't get comfortable. He replaces it with old run down furniture that he had in storage, and which he finds more to his liking, though it is completely incompatable with the color schemes and decor in your home. You catch him, and try to stop him ... he decides to bring you to court, and the court rules in his favor cuz you really never specified in a contract what his boundaries where, and because you have been making him pay a large sum for rent. YOU now have to replace your furniture, and live with third party furniture, and you can't do anything to get rid of this renter ... who is causing you all sorts of problems, and discomforts. How is that fair, considering it is your house to begin with? In the end ... MS did create this OS ... they should have the right to do whatever it is they want with it. In fact ... sometimes i think that they should start charging all these third party appz rent, to use space on their OS, then maybe all this complaining or bitching will come to an end (though I doubt that since it is in peoples nature to complain about everything).

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:)

Tra_Vuz:

Your analogy is severly faulted. If I had a choice of boarding houses (in your context) to choose from, then you would be correct. BUT, when you change the rules to where you're the only place where a boarder can go, then you can't expect the boarder to live life in a narrow confine that you dictate.

In broader terms: IF M$ hadn't obligated the oems to using ONLY Windows on all their machines - or they lost their contract to use Windows; and M$ hadn't coerced the major software house early in their developement with the same type pressures; and hadn't bought up developing companies that had products that showed potentially greater value - then they wouldn't have so many people down on their case.

Secondly - the larger legal problems for them started initially because of their restrictive contacts, that were declared (by two different courts) to be unfairly monopolistic. You can't simply go out and attempt to control the world through methods that are blatantly illegal (not to mention immoral)!!

What if your local telephone company dictated what type phone you could use, who you could call, and when you could call; simply because they have control of the local market?

In short - GET REAL!!! Broaden your scope for the benefit of mankind, not defend some sleazy jerk's and their lousey business practices!!



Last edited by Woogieman at Today at 9:46 am

Tra_Vuz's analogy does not fit properly. For it to work. Microsoft would be collecting rent only for the furnishings. The renter, person paying the rent, would be putting the furnishings in his/her own house. If the renter did not like the way the furnishings worked together with his/her house then some of them could be safely packed away in order to make room for some of the old furniture.

with all due respect ... i think you missed the gist of this hypthetical situation that i stated. Have you ever rented out a room, and do you even understand the laws the boarder is subjected to. What i stated was nothing ... if not lacking in a better definition of those laws. I have rented out to people ... trust me when i say that if put in that situation, your gut instinct is to make sure that all you do is keep an eye out for troublesome boarders, and you will not hesitate to make sure that they follow the letter of the laws. Let's be realistic ... it is my property, and i'm working hard to make sure i meet my mortgage payments, and that my investment is not destroyed by some immature jerk. Does that make me unfair, and if so ... how? I work hard to keep my home running smoothly, and so ... cuz i have a boarder ... i should allow him to take control cuz he pays rent. No ... he/she respect my property, and accepts those rules or he/she can leave and find someone who is stupid enough to let them control what is not theirs to control. That applies to MS as well ... why should they allow ppl to control something that is not theirs to control. It is their property.

How you see MS controlling the world with software is beyond me cuz obviously i'm missing something here. I mean, are there subliminal messages during the start up process that is making me fork over money or something. They're running a business and buying up softare houses that will benefit them ... somehow all of a sudden that's become wrong. Man, i guess i was actually thinking that that is the way to do things, and exactly how even i would run a big companies. In fact how many other companies have done the exact same thing, and yet not one person is bitching or complaining about these unfair business tactics. In fact, aren't you being just a bit to paranoid here. Sorry to burst your little bubble but they can't take over the world, and there are alot more things that are unfair in this world but for some reason a guy who's a bit aggressive in the way he deals with his customers ... suddenly that affects everybody. How is beyond me cuz that's just it ... it hasn't affected me at all, and as far as Bill Gates goes ... that's just it ... i could really care less. I don't defend him, and in my eyes ... he's the lesser of 2 evils. Worry about Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden ... those are the people with the mad visions of ruling our world, and those are the sick perverted people who will go to great lengths to do it. BIll Gates is a business man, and when it comes to business ... their is nothing unfair about the way he runs it ... i've seen and heard worse. In case you've forgotten, what about Enron and World Com ... i would take working for Gates over those 2 companies cuz at least he's not ripping off his workers, or causing them all to get their collective asses kicked out of their jobs cuz of greed. As for our local telephone company ... they've already put restrictions and applied rules cuz with DSL we are being capped, and those using their service are being forced to pay more, and guess why ... cuz they do control the local market. But guess what, i'm not about to put them down or start a web page condemning them ... nor will i mention their name cuz in the end it's all about running a business, and that's what makes the world go round.

Sorry, business is not suppose to work that way. There are legal and moral issues that a businessman is required to respect. And you are absolutely correct, the Enron and Worldcom examples are indicative of where business in our country has evolved to - "slid" to, is probably a more apt comment. As a businessman, and I was a Vice-President for an International Corporation with headquaters in New York city until I retired 5 years ago, I was concerned with the every growing tendency that started (probably) in the mid-1980's for corporations to start playing "games" with their balance sheets and their employees lives. "Paper" profits started becoming more important than real profits; and, dumping thousands of loyal, long term, U.S. employees to bolster profits by a few more percentage points by closing plants here and sending the work abroad.

I know this topic is getting far afield from where er started; but, to bring it back closer: A business is supposed to treat their customers with due respect. Buying up competition for the sole purpose of causing a competing product to disapear is simply not right, legally or morally. Nor is using illegal tactics to limit your customer as to what they can offer. And courts have agreed with that position,as M$ has found out more than once.

Boarders: Up until July 1st of this year, I was sort of in the same position as you. In 1990, I decided to lease out one of the homes that I own, but rarely used. When the fellow signed the lease agreement, I told him that I expected him to treat the home as if it was his own, and keep it up as if it was his own. He replied that he would try, but he probably was only going to be there for 2 to 3 years. He finally moved out after almost 12 years of leasing from me - not once did I bother making the journey to that city to check on him or my property, simply depending on an exchange of letters at Christmas to keep me updated. When he informed me that he finally was able to purchase his own home, I flew there to get the keys and arrange selling of the property. I was amazed to find how well the fellow and his family had treated and kept the property.

The moral of this? You just might have better luck with your tennents if you give them a bit more leeway and respect - and the same could be said for M$!!



Last edited by Woogieman at Today at 12:21 pm

You're absolutely right ... no business should be run that way but unfortunately, in today world, morals and ethics no longer apply, and customers take a back seat when it comes to lining someones pockets with our hard earned cash. Welcome to the real world ... where the customer is nothing more than a pawn. Let's be realistic for once ... I'm sure there are alot more ruthless business men out there than Gates ... it's just that he's more successful than others and that automatically makes him every ones fave target. I don't know if it's out of jealousy or if it is out of concern for your fellow man ... or even fear ... but everyone seems to have an agenda when it comes to that lone person, and again realistically ... he's done nothing that really affects you or I. If everything you state is true ... linux and certainly the mac would not exist today. How could they ... he would have gotten rid of them before they ever became a threat, and i'm sure that he is intelligent enough to know that you strike at any opponent before he/she/ it ever becomes a threat. What i don't get is this; if there is such hatred towards his business practices then why do ppl use his software to the point that they have gone crazy to get even warezed versions of his appz ... why support him at all. If i had something against someone that you describe as being so evil ... i certainly would have nothing to do with any of his software, or anything else that came from that company. It's really easy ... if you don't like him then get rid of all his software whether it be legal or warezed, and be done with the man. If you don't personally use his software ... then stop with this holy war cuz we've all seen what comes out of that. There are plenty of other OS's out there and Office apps as well ... leave MS stuff for the people that enjoy using it, and btw ... i've never had any problems with XP or ME or WIN 95/98/98SE ... no troubles whatsoever or loss of files. The only time i got blue screened was when i installed Netscape. Guess what i did ... i got rid of it and have since never touched that browser. That simple really.

P.s i'm really glad that you've been so fortunate throughout your life and i'm glad that your tenants respected your property after renting it out to them. You're one of the lucky ones ... thankfully, i have been just as fortunate. Yet i can tell you a few horror stories, that would make you think twice. But that should be left for another time, and certainly another forum.

"I know this topic is getting far afield from where er started; but, to bring it back closer: A business is supposed to treat their customers with due respect. "

Nice try, but I'm gonna bring this a LOT closer to the original topic. I'm just surprised that a prog as ubiquitous as Norton WinDoctor would undo M$ efforts to 'hide' 'optional' programs. Wonder if this will hapen with OEM sytems. EG: HP sets up thier consumer systems they way they want to sell them then customer 'A' uses WinDoctor and all the 'Hidden' software re-appears! :D :D

Me? I'll just use antispy to remove messenger.

}---:)