The XP SP2 Horror to come.

[TR]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

A place I came across on the web that has a very helpful checklist of
things to do before attempting SP2... You might be familiar with it
(G) but others that don't know of its existance might like it posted
here.....

http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm

Regards,
TR

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:46:46 -0400, TR <fakeaddress@forspammers.com>
wrote:

>A follow up on the computer store with the 9 display computers that
>had sp2 put on them...
>
>The one that just would not boot after... He finally did a full
>restoration this morning, not hard since it had nothing more on it
>than what was on the restoration. The computer is sitting there
>waiting to be notified of the sp2 update since that is the only way
>you can get the update (through the automatic notification). You
>can't get it from the online update site.
>
>So.... they are waiting.... waiting..... waiting.......
>
>They have tried the time setting for the download and the chosen time
>has passed by two times and nothing. He is wondering if they have
>pulled the update or something.....
>
>So... I had turned auto notification off completely on this desktop,
>opting to just check manually on a daily bases to see if there were
>any criticals available. I turned auto notify back on and waited...
>Nothing. I then also set a time to do the check and it passed with
>nothing...
>
>Do you suppose they pulled it?
>
>Regards,
>TR

I downloaded the 'stand alone' version of the update - its big - about
+260Mb but you can get form here

http://www.filemirrors.com/search.src?file=WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe&size=278927592

Note: Link may wrap

Cheers

 

[TR]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:19:55 GMT, Justin Thompson
<Justin.Thompson@removethisntlworld.com> wrote:

>I downloaded the 'stand alone' version of the update - its big - about
>+260Mb but you can get form here
>http://www.filemirrors.com/search.src?file=WindowsXP-KB835935-SP2-ENU.exe&size=278927592

Got it later this morning Justin and also found out via Jupiter as to
why some are getting the AU to go through and others are not....

Also, the following gets you the same:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=049C9DBE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

Regards,
TR

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

Yep, I originally made that page for SP-1 and extensively changed it
for SP-2.
Also you may want to see the sister page:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/xpsp2.htm
Especially just added FAQ #7 which I will add to once Microsoft gets
back to me with more details, hopefully within a few hours.
It seems there is more information that will clear up what seems to be
a problem but may not be.

--
Jupiter Jones
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
news:k6eci09u0kg1iergaf5t6b09lvfld1oh6f@4ax.com...
>A place I came across on the web that has a very helpful checklist of
> things to do before attempting SP2... You might be familiar with it
> (G) but others that don't know of its existance might like it posted
> here.....
>
> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm
>
> Regards,
> TR

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

On 20 Aug 2004 13:46:24 -0700, samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams)
wrote:

>There are other office productivity packages and they work about as
>well as M$ Office. If you are running a business with employees you
>don't regard as fungible cogs, getting them to use other programs is
>pretty simple. They are generally far less expensive, often more
>robust, and some probably easier to use.

Lordy me - you need a reality check.
MS have it right (from their perspective). Your theory falls down as
soon as your business tries to collaborate with anyone else. As soon
as you start sharing then the recipients cant read the stuff you send
- or you cant read the stuff they send.

So as a business, what you going to do? Then people get used to MS at
work and feel comfortable with it and want to use/share at home.

Before you know it you have a monolithic mega corp who has monopolised
the market with a few insignificant people, milling around the
periphery harping on about other packages, who have missed the plot
completely.

Cheers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

"Justin Thompson" <Justin.Thompson@removethisntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:e5pci0h5en2atksbf1iudo7rqh0f8utvdi@4ax.com...
> On 20 Aug 2004 13:46:24 -0700, samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams)
> wrote:
>
>>There are other office productivity packages and they work about as
>>well as M$ Office. If you are running a business with employees you
>>don't regard as fungible cogs, getting them to use other programs is
>>pretty simple. They are generally far less expensive, often more
>>robust, and some probably easier to use.
>
> Lordy me - you need a reality check.
> MS have it right (from their perspective). Your theory falls down as
> soon as your business tries to collaborate with anyone else. As soon
> as you start sharing then the recipients cant read the stuff you send
> - or you cant read the stuff they send.
>
> So as a business, what you going to do?

Well, you could use OpenOffice. Compatibility is great (except on the
database side). The price is right (FREE). I'm partially migrating my
company to OpenOffice. Most will still use MS, but users who only need the
occassional wordprocessing or spreadsheet will have OpenOffice.


--
"Hurricane" Andrew

------

Freedom and fear are at war. The advance of human freedom -- the great
achievement of our time, and the great hope of every time -- now depends on
us... We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.

--President George W. Bush, September 20, 2001

 

[dman]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams) scribbled some garbage about a
problem in news:d792394d.0408201246.822da71@posting.google.com: and Dman
answered with his usually sarcastic remark in the following manner!

> There are other office productivity packages and they work about as
> well as M$ Office. If you are running a business with employees you
> don't regard as fungible cogs, getting them to use other programs is
> pretty simple. They are generally far less expensive, often more
> robust, and some probably easier to use.
>

Apparently you are to daft to really understand how the real world works.
Your output from a particular program has to be able to be used by THE
OTHER PRODUCTIVITY PACKAGES you refer to. Yes there are other packages
available and as soon as you get a few hundred million machines running
them then you may have a somewhat valid point.
But right now you are pissing in the wind with little information to
really back it up.



--
( ,&&&.
) .,.&&
( ( \=__/
) ,'-'.
( ( ,, _.__|/ /|
) /\ -((------((_|___/ |
( // | (`' (( `'--|
_ -.;_/ \\--._ \\ \-._/.
(_;-// | \ \-'.\ <_,\_\`--'|
( `.__ _ ___,') <_,-'__,'
`'(_ )_)(_)_)'

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 00:13:25 GMT, "Andrew Rossetti"
<arossetti@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>Well, you could use OpenOffice. Compatibility is great (except on the
>database side). The price is right (FREE). I'm partially migrating my
>company to OpenOffice. Most will still use MS, but users who only need the
>occassional wordprocessing or spreadsheet will have OpenOffice.
Why noy ALL use OpenOffice? because it is not fully compatible thats
why. So what you going to do when someone develops a nice productivity
tool using some advanced feature of the MS package - you then have
groups of employees who you cannot deploy to - or you have to upgrade
and spend the money + all the cost of doing the upgrade and the
management time.

Also, you now you have 2 office productivity packages to support and
then people who change roles need to be migrated to MS or away from MS
to fit with their new requirements, then they need to be retrained (or
at least are less effective while they learn best practice).

I suspect you are a small company but belive me - I am responsible for
managing such services in a company with 3500 employees (with total
company of 70,000) and the TCO (Total cost of ownership) means your
OpenOffice solution is not FREE.

You have too much time on your hands if you want to mess around in
this space.

Cheers.

 

[moe]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

Latest import from Microsoft.


Thank you for taking time to reply to me. I have received feedback from
Microsoft product develop team that the behavior is by design. Therefore, we
may not be able to change it.

I understand this feature is important for you and I will check if we
receive many similar issues in the next days. If so, I will submit a new
report to Microsoft product develop team and check if they will develop an
update to change this behavior.


"Moe" <spamcop12000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5aWdneiikMKmer7cRVn-sg@comcast.com...
> Even Microsoft Outlook Express has a bug with the SP2 update. If an email
> has a URL (link) in
> it, the color of it will always be "BLUE" meaning that the site is not in
> your history file. If you do a "FORWARD" or "REPLY" of that email and you
> have been to that site before and it is still in your history file the
> color
> of the URL (link) will be "MAROON" (Standard default colors). The color
> shown of a URL link worked correctly before the SP2 update. I noticed it
> also did not work in the RC1 release. I did a re-install of XP Home
> after the RC1 release and waited for the SP2 release.
>
> I have been in contact with Microsoft Support and they are looking into
> it.
> Support is not sure if it is a design change or a "BUG".
>
> "TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
> news:4v95i0hg6fa2qp035q0e5vcmia15be0o6s@4ax.com...
>> The list of programs that will work "differently" after the service
>> pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer
>> roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further)
>> http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457
>>
>> Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications
>> including Office!
>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130
>>
>> But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the
>> public sort it out as usual.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

>
> Apparently you are to daft to really understand how the real world works.
> Your output from a particular program has to be able to be used by THE
> OTHER PRODUCTIVITY PACKAGES you refer to. Yes there are other packages
> available and as soon as you get a few hundred million machines running
> them then you may have a somewhat valid point.
> But right now you are pissing in the wind with little information to
> really back it up.

You are under a powerful narcotic, apparently manufactured in
Redmond, that makes people unable to comprehend that other programs
can generate, accept, and convert M$ Word and Excel files. They can.
You do not need M$ Word to read Word files.


Further, the only reason to produce a .doc file is so that you can
Print the file and send it on as a physical letter. .pdf files work a
lot better if you need a 'virtual document'.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers) wrote in message news:<41256b53.28988920@news.charter.net>...
> The real operating system being??? How abovt the operating system I WROTE from
> scratch for the GE-225 compvter back in the mid-1960's? Instead of reading all
> programs from pvnched cards as done previovsly, it loaded programs from a hard
> disk the size of a pizza oven, with TWO refrigerator-sized controllers to handle
> the disk. Is that real enovgh for yov?
>
> I hate to pvt some reality into yovr head, bvt the operating system is NOT the
> reason for people making the choices they do in this millenivm. The SOFTWARE
> APPLICATIONS are what drives people to choose compvter and operating system,
> becavse people actvally vse software applications programs to do real work..
>
> Microsoft Office has 90% of the office prodvctivitiy marketplace. Show me an
> operating system that can rvn Microsoft Office XP and that's the operating
> system people will bvy. Oops! The only answer is Windows XP. Microsoft
> actvally DOES have a monopoly. The US Dept of Jvstice fovnd that Microsoft has
> a monopoly, bvt the Bvsh administration dropped the ball. Mario Monti's
> Evropean Union anti-trvst vnit has also fovnd Microsoft gvilty of monopolistic
> practices, and Microsoft is fighting that one like mad. If yov go back as long
> as I do in this bvsiness, yov, too, wovld be able to tell trve stories of how
> Microsoft bvilt its monopoly, pvtting other companies ovt of bvsiness with sharp
> practices.

Show me any company withovt "sharp practices". Most of M$'s
competitors, in the end, pvt themselves ovt of bvsiness with
stvpidity...certainly Commodore, Be, and several other system vendors
did. And NeXT was headed that way when Steve Jobs bvllshitted Apple
into bvying his company ovt. As someone else pointed ovt, NeXT was a
patchwork of other people's intellectval property, and the royalty
strvctvre was prohibitive. Apple was stvpid to adopt PostScript and
other Adobe things withovt getting a piece of Adobe too big for
Warnock to eat.NeXT perpetvated the error...jvst like Jobs' insistence
on not vsing cooling fans and his preference for high resolvtion
monochrome over slightly less detailed color.

As far as Gateway goes, I think Ted Waitt loves a good ham-slamming
from Bill Gates now and again. Probably why he cvts his ponytail-the
hairs cvt into old Bill's knob. That's why M$ will modvlate their
royalties from Gateway to keep them arovnd.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

"Latest import from Microsoft." Well put! Evidently written by someone with a
poor command of the English language. Probably not speaking English as a first
language. Could be one of the children left behind by the meaningless and
non-funded "No Child Left Behind Act." Nice to know that Microsoft cares so
much about the quality of all its products and services... Ben Myers

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:26:25 -0400, "Moe" <spamcop12000@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Latest import from Microsoft.
>
>
>Thank you for taking time to reply to me. I have received feedback from
>Microsoft product develop team that the behavior is by design. Therefore, we
>may not be able to change it.
>
>I understand this feature is important for you and I will check if we
>receive many similar issues in the next days. If so, I will submit a new
>report to Microsoft product develop team and check if they will develop an
>update to change this behavior.
>
>
>"Moe" <spamcop12000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:5aWdneiikMKmer7cRVn-sg@comcast.com...
>> Even Microsoft Outlook Express has a bug with the SP2 update. If an email
>> has a URL (link) in
>> it, the color of it will always be "BLUE" meaning that the site is not in
>> your history file. If you do a "FORWARD" or "REPLY" of that email and you
>> have been to that site before and it is still in your history file the
>> color
>> of the URL (link) will be "MAROON" (Standard default colors). The color
>> shown of a URL link worked correctly before the SP2 update. I noticed it
>> also did not work in the RC1 release. I did a re-install of XP Home
>> after the RC1 release and waited for the SP2 release.
>>
>> I have been in contact with Microsoft Support and they are looking into
>> it.
>> Support is not sure if it is a design change or a "BUG".
>>
>> "TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
>> news:4v95i0hg6fa2qp035q0e5vcmia15be0o6s@4ax.com...
>>> The list of programs that will work "differently" after the service
>>> pack 2 has expanded to 200 applications on the eve of the consumer
>>> roll out of the update. (Microsoft's update troubles deepen further)
>>> http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news.php?newsId=457
>>>
>>> Believe it or not... The List includes a lot of MS's own applications
>>> including Office!
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884130
>>>
>>> But what the hell... Bill's still going to release it and let the
>>> public sort it out as usual.
>>
>>
>
>

 

[dman]

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.gateway2000 (More info?)

samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams) scribbled some garbage about a
problem in news:d792394d.0408211406.6923da36@posting.google.com: and
Dman answered with his usually sarcastic remark in the following manner!

>>
>> Apparently you are to daft to really understand how the real world
>> works. Your output from a particular program has to be able to be
>> used by THE OTHER PRODUCTIVITY PACKAGES you refer to. Yes there are
>> other packages available and as soon as you get a few hundred million
>> machines running them then you may have a somewhat valid point.
>> But right now you are pissing in the wind with little information to
>> really back it up.
>
> You are under a powerful narcotic, apparently manufactured in
> Redmond, that makes people unable to comprehend that other programs
> can generate, accept, and convert M$ Word and Excel files. They can.
> You do not need M$ Word to read Word files.
>
>
> Further, the only reason to produce a .doc file is so that you can
> Print the file and send it on as a physical letter. .pdf files work a
> lot better if you need a 'virtual document'.

No, it's not a narcotic, it's just REALITY. Believe me I have no LOVE at
all for M$ or anything related to them. I just know what happens in the
real world.
Why you would use a word .doc as your example is frivilous and doesn't
really have a valid basis.
I more refer to the Excel, Access, Powerpoint areas and their dominance
and lack of useabilty with other programs. Notice I did not say 100% or
the time.

:0

--
( ,&&&.
) .,.&&
( ( \=__/
) ,'-'.
( ( ,, _.__|/ /|
) /\ -((------((_|___/ |
( // | (`' (( `'--|
_ -.;_/ \\--._ \\ \-._/.
(_;-// | \ \-'.\ <_,\_\`--'|
( `.__ _ ___,') <_,-'__,'
`'(_ )_)(_)_)'