Kyobanim
05-12-2004, 12:41
UPGRADE FROM GIRLFRIEND 6.0 TO WIFE 1.0
Last year, a friend of mine, a Systems Administrator, like myself, changed the application GIRLFRIEND 6.0 to WIFE 1.0 just to find out that the upgrade left much to be desired. In the first place, WIFE 1.0 left very scarce systems resources for other applications. And not only that, he also found out that WIFE 1.0 is also a prolific processor of KIDS 1.x, which are additional consumers of valuable resources.
There was no mention of this particular phenomenon in the documentation supplied by the manufacturer, neither in its warranty, even though other colleagues informed him of the expected outcome due to the nature of the application. But the surprises did not end there. WIFE 1.0 auto-configures its self to automatically launch during the initialization of the system (in back-ground as well as fore-ground), from where it monitors all other processes. My friend is finding out that certain applications, like POKER NITE 10.3, BEER DRINKING 2.5 and PUB NITES 7.0 can no longer be executed because WIFE 1.0 blocks the system when they are selected (even though, before, everything worked fine).
During its installation, WIFE 1.0 automatically adds in *.ini and batch files indexed services as well, e.g. MOTHER-IN-LAW 55.8 and BROTHER–IN-LAW in DEMO version. The most notable effects of these add-ons is a daily and progressive deterioration of the efficiency of the system.
My buddy, who does not give up, is seriously considering changing the WIFE application version but he would like to see certain characteristics added on in WIFE 2.0:
A "forget about me" and a "minimize" button; The incorporation of an option that permits WIFE 2.0 to "uninstall at any moment", without the loss of the caché and other basic resources of the system; An option to run the network controller in "promiscuous mode", that allows the system to test, in "shareware" version ,diverse applications from the competitors, in order to enrich ones knowledge of applications available on the market.
As for myself, I have decided to avoid those headaches associated to WIFE 1.0, and continue with GIRLFRIEND 2.0. Even this way, I have found various problems…
Apparently, you cannot install GIRLFRIEND 2.0 over GIRLFRIEND 1.0; first you should uninstall GIRLFRIEND 1.0. Also, the diverse versions of GIRLFRIEND have conflicts sharing the I/O (In/Out) ports. At the Technical Support Desk (TSD), I was informed that it was because of a bug, and they are trying to figure out a way to get around the problem, but as it seams, it is implemented in the Kernel (heart) of the application and they do not advice modifying that.
To make things worse, the program for uninstalling GIRLFRIEND 1.0 does not work well, leaving unwanted bits and bytes in the system. Another problem: All versions of GIRLFRIEND keep launching annoying messages about the benefits of upgrading to WIFE 1.0. When I referred to the TSD again, they suggested that I ignore these messages, and when I responded that for a solution like that I wouldn’t have called, they referred me to the above explanation (bug in kernel).
Last year, a friend of mine, a Systems Administrator, like myself, changed the application GIRLFRIEND 6.0 to WIFE 1.0 just to find out that the upgrade left much to be desired. In the first place, WIFE 1.0 left very scarce systems resources for other applications. And not only that, he also found out that WIFE 1.0 is also a prolific processor of KIDS 1.x, which are additional consumers of valuable resources.
There was no mention of this particular phenomenon in the documentation supplied by the manufacturer, neither in its warranty, even though other colleagues informed him of the expected outcome due to the nature of the application. But the surprises did not end there. WIFE 1.0 auto-configures its self to automatically launch during the initialization of the system (in back-ground as well as fore-ground), from where it monitors all other processes. My friend is finding out that certain applications, like POKER NITE 10.3, BEER DRINKING 2.5 and PUB NITES 7.0 can no longer be executed because WIFE 1.0 blocks the system when they are selected (even though, before, everything worked fine).
During its installation, WIFE 1.0 automatically adds in *.ini and batch files indexed services as well, e.g. MOTHER-IN-LAW 55.8 and BROTHER–IN-LAW in DEMO version. The most notable effects of these add-ons is a daily and progressive deterioration of the efficiency of the system.
My buddy, who does not give up, is seriously considering changing the WIFE application version but he would like to see certain characteristics added on in WIFE 2.0:
A "forget about me" and a "minimize" button; The incorporation of an option that permits WIFE 2.0 to "uninstall at any moment", without the loss of the caché and other basic resources of the system; An option to run the network controller in "promiscuous mode", that allows the system to test, in "shareware" version ,diverse applications from the competitors, in order to enrich ones knowledge of applications available on the market.
As for myself, I have decided to avoid those headaches associated to WIFE 1.0, and continue with GIRLFRIEND 2.0. Even this way, I have found various problems…
Apparently, you cannot install GIRLFRIEND 2.0 over GIRLFRIEND 1.0; first you should uninstall GIRLFRIEND 1.0. Also, the diverse versions of GIRLFRIEND have conflicts sharing the I/O (In/Out) ports. At the Technical Support Desk (TSD), I was informed that it was because of a bug, and they are trying to figure out a way to get around the problem, but as it seams, it is implemented in the Kernel (heart) of the application and they do not advice modifying that.
To make things worse, the program for uninstalling GIRLFRIEND 1.0 does not work well, leaving unwanted bits and bytes in the system. Another problem: All versions of GIRLFRIEND keep launching annoying messages about the benefits of upgrading to WIFE 1.0. When I referred to the TSD again, they suggested that I ignore these messages, and when I responded that for a solution like that I wouldn’t have called, they referred me to the above explanation (bug in kernel).