Jump to content

Turmoil Continues in XP land


Recommended Posts

Guest smith
Posted

Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

 

We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

(such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

special report.

 

http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

 

 

Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

monitor developments.

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

But this is really a no-brainer. You just stay away from SP3 -

permanently. And who really needs it? (rhetorical).

 

smith wrote:

> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>

> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

> special report.

>

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>

>

> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

> monitor developments.

Guest Gary S. Terhune
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Everybody knows that RTM brings on major bug reports. Big deal. Happens

every time, and every time, it all gets patched up as best as it can be, and

fairly quickly, too.

 

Besides, only a small portion of the blame can be laid at Microsoft's feet,

if any.

 

From the article:

"The problems with XP SP3 include AMD-based Hewlett-Packard desktop

computers constantly rebooting and Symantec antivirus products developing

strange behaviors. It makes me wonder which executives at HP and Symantec

were supposed to test these companies' products during the months-long beta

releases of SP3."

 

Now THAT is sensible writing. And more indicative of the "problem" with XP

SP3 than anything I've read yet. Here's more of the same...

http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529#patch0

 

Now, why does it not surprise me that Symantec is involved in one of the two

major complaints?

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

 

"smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>

> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

> special report.

>

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>

>

> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

> monitor developments.

Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Ah, ZDNET has been writing more *descriptive* articles, might want to look

there.

 

--

MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com

--

_________

 

"smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

| Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

|

| We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

| (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

| for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

| special report.

|

| http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

|

|

| Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

| monitor developments.

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system (e.g: larger HD

support, a pop-up blocker, a Firewall, etc, etc - unlike SP2. There is a

HUGE difference between the two. And as you yourself have noted, true

security comes from the user practices (not from all these so-called

"security updates", which often bring their own problems with them (and I've

been around the block once too often, on that).

 

Gary S. Terhune wrote:

> Everybody knows that RTM brings on major bug reports. Big deal. Happens

> every time, and every time, it all gets patched up as best as it can be,

> and

> fairly quickly, too.

>

> Besides, only a small portion of the blame can be laid at Microsoft's

> feet,

> if any.

>

> From the article:

> "The problems with XP SP3 include AMD-based Hewlett-Packard desktop

> computers constantly rebooting and Symantec antivirus products developing

> strange behaviors. It makes me wonder which executives at HP and Symantec

> were supposed to test these companies' products during the months-long

> beta

> releases of SP3."

>

> Now THAT is sensible writing. And more indicative of the "problem" with XP

> SP3 than anything I've read yet. Here's more of the same...

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529#patch0

>

> Now, why does it not surprise me that Symantec is involved in one of the

> two

> major complaints?

>

> --

> Gary S. Terhune

> MS-MVP Shell/User

> http://www.grystmill.com

>

>

> "smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>>

>> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

>> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

>> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

>> special report.

>>

>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>>

>>

>> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

>> monitor developments.

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Fixes aren't useful?

 

List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

--

~PAÞ

 

Bill in Co. wrote:

> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

Guest Tanner-'op
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

smith wrote:

> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>

> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

> special report.

>

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>

>

> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

> monitor developments.

 

I have an AMD processor running Norton IS and downloaded SP3 - all with no

problem. So it is not all doom and gloom. :-)

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Last time I looked at that list, I didn't see anything earth-shaking. If

my memory is wrong, please show me something really earthshaking in the list

(in the same league as what I mentioned earlier).

 

 

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

> Fixes aren't useful?

>

> List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

> --

> ~PAÞ

>

> Bill in Co. wrote:

>> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

Guest Lil' Dave
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

"smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>

> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

> special report.

>

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>

>

> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

> monitor developments.

 

Consider myself conservative regarding use of any update. Whether it be the

OS, IE, or 3rd party software. I was lured by SE for 98, and it was good

thing. There were snags in many fixes of many versions of IE. Remember

there was a 5.5 version?

 

Been lurking at the XP general newsgroup for a few years. There was plenty

of PCs broke by SP2 for one reason or the other per posts. I waited 6

months for anything spectacular like a re-release of a revised SP2. I bit

the bullet, and installed SP2 from the MS provided CD. Smooth as silk, but

lengthy. Am playing the same waiting game on SP3. Guessing the results

will be the same again. MS has not released the CD for XP SP3 update to

date either.

 

For those who have been around a long time, perhaps the worst I've seen is

the Millenium Edition upgrade on a 98 system. Saw more complaints posted on

this at the MS newsgroup site than anything before or after.

 

Myself, don't recommend upgrades of any MS OS to another sequential OS.

Clean install.

 

Service packs for XP were designed to avert security issues. They may

modify some serious system files as part of the upgrade. Always have a

backup prior to applying a service pack in XP. Similar with IE and 3rd

party software. The inconvenience is small compared to rebuilding the

entire OS, etc.

--

Dave

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Lil' Dave wrote:

> "smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>>

>> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

>> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

>> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

>> special report.

>>

>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>>

>>

>> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

>> monitor developments.

>

> Consider myself conservative regarding use of any update.

 

Same here. And for good reason (been around the block too many times - so

thanks, but no thanks) for almost all of these so-called "updates".

> Whether it be the

> OS, IE, or 3rd party software. I was lured by SE for 98, and it was good

> thing. There were snags in many fixes of many versions of IE. Remember

> there was a 5.5 version?

 

Indeed, two of the IE 5.5 DLL's were basically required to fix that stupid

"copying or deleting a large number of files in explorer" problem that came

with IE6 for Win98SE.

> Been lurking at the XP general newsgroup for a few years. There was

> plenty

> of PCs broke by SP2 for one reason or the other per posts. I waited 6

> months for anything spectacular like a re-release of a revised SP2. I

> bit

> the bullet, and installed SP2 from the MS provided CD. Smooth as silk,

> but

> lengthy. Am playing the same waiting game on SP3.

 

Well, we differ here, as I'm not waiting. I'm simply not going to install

it, ever, end of story. (And if you check the release notes on SP3 for XP,

you'll see that SP3 offers essentially NOTHING of real value and substance -

or of REAL significance).

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Still waiting to hear about all these alleged "earth-shaking" changes (i.e.,

that are in the same league, as, say, SP2).

> Last time I looked at that list, I didn't see anything earth-shaking.

> If

> my memory is wrong, please show me something really earthshaking in the

> list

> (in the same league as what I mentioned earlier).

>

>

> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>> Fixes aren't useful?

>>

>> List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

>> --

>> ~PAÞ

>>

>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

Guest Gary S. Terhune
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Why would you be expecting such? Some people would say that SP2 is much MORE

than just a Service Pack.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:%23nmfM5uwIHA.420@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Still waiting to hear about all these alleged "earth-shaking" changes

> (i.e., that are in the same league, as, say, SP2).

>

>> Last time I looked at that list, I didn't see anything earth-shaking. If

>> my memory is wrong, please show me something really earthshaking in the

>> list

>> (in the same league as what I mentioned earlier).

>>

>>

>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>> Fixes aren't useful?

>>>

>>> List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

>>> --

>>> ~PAÞ

>>>

>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

>

>

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Well, all I can tell you is that it was called SP2, and it really brought

some needed things (especially. in regards to the really needed, large disk

access. The built in popup killer and Firewall doesn't hurt, either

(although I'm not using them, but am instead using my own).

 

One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of the

routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

 

And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have to

do this now.

 

Before, pre-SP2, ALL of this was done automatically.

(and yes, I know the "reason" for this (to protect the "masses"). :-).

Gary S. Terhune wrote:

> Why would you be expecting such? Some people would say that SP2 is much

> MORE than just a Service Pack.

>

> --

> Gary S. Terhune

> MS-MVP Shell/User

> http://www.grystmill.com

>

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

> news:%23nmfM5uwIHA.420@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Still waiting to hear about all these alleged "earth-shaking" changes

>> (i.e., that are in the same league, as, say, SP2).

>>

>>> Last time I looked at that list, I didn't see anything earth-shaking. If

>>> my memory is wrong, please show me something really earthshaking in the

>>> list

>>> (in the same league as what I mentioned earlier).

>>>

>>>

>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>>> Fixes aren't useful?

>>>>

>>>> List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

>>>> --

>>>> ~PAÞ

>>>>

>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>>> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Bill in Co. wrote:

> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of the

> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>

> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have

> to

> do this now.

 

Poor, poor Bill!

 

There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger PIA,

having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting older BAK

files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store due to

corruption and not having any backups in place?

--

~PAÞ

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

> Bill in Co. wrote:

>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of

>> the

>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>>

>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

>> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have

>> to do this now.

>

> Poor, poor Bill!

>

> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger PIA,

> having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting older

> BAK

> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store due

> to

> corruption and not having any backups in place?

 

Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that. Damn, I must

just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just like I

haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that we just can't

live safely without (snort)!.

 

Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for example),

didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the middle

of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or whatever?

Nah, can't be. :-)

Guest Lil' Dave
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:ubXrpyuwIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Lil' Dave wrote:

>> "smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

>> news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>>>

>>> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

>>> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

>>> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

>>> special report.

>>>

>>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>>>

>>>

>>> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

>>> monitor developments.

>>

>> Consider myself conservative regarding use of any update.

>

> Same here. And for good reason (been around the block too many times -

> so thanks, but no thanks) for almost all of these so-called "updates".

>

>> Whether it be the

>> OS, IE, or 3rd party software. I was lured by SE for 98, and it was good

>> thing. There were snags in many fixes of many versions of IE. Remember

>> there was a 5.5 version?

>

> Indeed, two of the IE 5.5 DLL's were basically required to fix that stupid

> "copying or deleting a large number of files in explorer" problem that

> came with IE6 for Win98SE.

>

>> Been lurking at the XP general newsgroup for a few years. There was

>> plenty

>> of PCs broke by SP2 for one reason or the other per posts. I waited 6

>> months for anything spectacular like a re-release of a revised SP2. I

>> bit

>> the bullet, and installed SP2 from the MS provided CD. Smooth as silk,

>> but

>> lengthy. Am playing the same waiting game on SP3.

>

> Well, we differ here, as I'm not waiting. I'm simply not going to

> install it, ever, end of story. (And if you check the release notes on

> SP3 for XP, you'll see that SP3 offers essentially NOTHING of real value

> and substance - or of REAL significance).

>

 

Now that's different. Uncle Bill is paying his nomes to make service packs

that don't do anything regarding security risks (SP3).

 

Living out in the boonies. No cable, no DSL. Satellite just too expensive.

Phone modem is what I use, 24 hours or more to download the ISO. So, I wait

for Uncle Bill's CD SP3 availability.

--

Dave

Guest Lil' Dave
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Whoa, trigger. SP1 provided the over 137GB hard disk thingie. IE7, not

SP2, has the popup killer-bobber. The firewall has always been there.

 

--

Dave

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:euC4jw2wIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Well, all I can tell you is that it was called SP2, and it really brought

> some needed things (especially. in regards to the really needed, large

> disk access. The built in popup killer and Firewall doesn't hurt,

> either (although I'm not using them, but am instead using my own).

>

> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of the

> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>

> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have

> to do this now.

>

> Before, pre-SP2, ALL of this was done automatically.

> (and yes, I know the "reason" for this (to protect the "masses"). :-).

> Gary S. Terhune wrote:

>> Why would you be expecting such? Some people would say that SP2 is much

>> MORE than just a Service Pack.

>>

>> --

>> Gary S. Terhune

>> MS-MVP Shell/User

>> http://www.grystmill.com

>>

>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

>> news:%23nmfM5uwIHA.420@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>> Still waiting to hear about all these alleged "earth-shaking" changes

>>> (i.e., that are in the same league, as, say, SP2).

>>>

>>>> Last time I looked at that list, I didn't see anything earth-shaking.

>>>> If

>>>> my memory is wrong, please show me something really earthshaking in the

>>>> list

>>>> (in the same league as what I mentioned earlier).

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>>>> Fixes aren't useful?

>>>>>

>>>>> List of fixes that are included in WinXP SP3

>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480

>>>>> --

>>>>> ~PAÞ

>>>>>

>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>>>> The point is, SP3 doesn't add anything USEFUL to the system...

>

>

Guest Lil' Dave
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of

>>> the

>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>>>

>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

>>> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have

>>> to do this now.

>>

>> Poor, poor Bill!

>>

>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger PIA,

>> having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting older

>> BAK

>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store due

>> to

>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

>

> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that. Damn, I

> must just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just like

> I haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that we just

> can't live safely without (snort)!.

>

> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for example),

> didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the

> middle of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or

> whatever? Nah, can't be. :-)

>

 

Do all the multi-tasking etc. with OE open in newsgroups arena, off and on,

not always.

 

I do have to, like in previous versions of OE, remove all headers etc., and

start over from time to time. About a year or so seems to be the

re-occurence. No big deal.

 

Once in a great while, OE will prompt me for compacting the posts.

 

I generally run "Office", rather, Outlook, to get my email. Word and other

"Office" apps, I don't often use while using OE.

--

Dave

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Lil' Dave wrote:

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

> news:ubXrpyuwIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Lil' Dave wrote:

>>> "smith" <smith@nospam.com> wrote in message

>>> news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>>> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>>>>

>>>> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come around

>>>> (such as May 29), but serious problems involving Service Pack 3

>>>> for Windows XP have made us work overtime to bring you today's

>>>> special report.

>>>>

>>>> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

>>>> monitor developments.

>>>

>>> Consider myself conservative regarding use of any update.

>>

>> Same here. And for good reason (been around the block too many times -

>> so thanks, but no thanks) for almost all of these so-called "updates".

>>

>>> Whether it be the

>>> OS, IE, or 3rd party software. I was lured by SE for 98, and it was

>>> good

>>> thing. There were snags in many fixes of many versions of IE. Remember

>>> there was a 5.5 version?

>>

>> Indeed, two of the IE 5.5 DLL's were basically required to fix that

>> stupid

>> "copying or deleting a large number of files in explorer" problem that

>> came with IE6 for Win98SE.

>>

>>> Been lurking at the XP general newsgroup for a few years. There was

>>> plenty

>>> of PCs broke by SP2 for one reason or the other per posts. I waited 6

>>> months for anything spectacular like a re-release of a revised SP2. I

>>> bit

>>> the bullet, and installed SP2 from the MS provided CD. Smooth as silk,

>>> but lengthy. Am playing the same waiting game on SP3.

>>

>> Well, we differ here, as I'm not waiting. I'm simply not going to

>> install it, ever, end of story. (And if you check the release notes on

>> SP3 for XP, you'll see that SP3 offers essentially NOTHING of real value

>> and substance - or of REAL significance).

>>

>

> Now that's different. Uncle Bill is paying his nomes to make service

> packs

> that don't do anything regarding security risks (SP3).

 

True security (only) lies within, grasshopper. No matter how much you

try, you can't protect people from their own stupidity. It's their own

PRACTICES that are the real PROBLEM here. The rest of this stuff is a

Band Aid.

Guest glee
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of the

>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>>>

>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

>>> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I* have

>>> to do this now.

>>

>> Poor, poor Bill!

>>

>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger PIA,

>> having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting older BAK

>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store due to

>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

>

> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that. Damn, I must just

> be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just like I haven't needed

> all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that we just can't live safely without

> (snort)!.

>

> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for example), didn't

> try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the middle of doing

> something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or whatever? Nah, can't be.

> :-)

 

Bill, I'm sorry to say the only thing you got right in your reply was the last

line..."Nah, can't be".

Multi-tasking and crashing are and were not an issue. The fact is background

compacting created problems with corrupted message stores for many users, as did A-V

email scanning. That doesn't mean EVERYONE had the problem. Because you did not

does not mean it doesn't exist, any more than the remark I posted recently about

smoking while fueling a car.....just because you haven't caused an explosion yet

doesn't mean it's safe!. ;-)

--

Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+

http://dts-l.net/

http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

glee wrote:

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

> news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of

>>>> the

>>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>>>>

>>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

>>>> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I*

>>>> have

>>>> to do this now.

>>>

>>> Poor, poor Bill!

>>>

>>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger PIA,

>>> having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting older

>>> BAK

>>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store

>>> due to

>>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

>>

>> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that. Damn, I

>> must

>> just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just like I

>> haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that we just

>> can't

>> live safely without (snort)!.

>>

>> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for

>> example),

>> didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the

>> middle

>> of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or

>> whatever?

>> Nah, can't be. :-)

>

> Bill, I'm sorry to say the only thing you got right in your reply was the

> last

> line..."Nah, can't be".

> Multi-tasking and crashing are and were not an issue. The fact is

> background

> compacting created problems with corrupted message stores for many users,

> as

> did A-V email scanning. That doesn't mean EVERYONE had the problem.

> Because you did not does not mean it doesn't exist, any more than the

> remark I posted recently about smoking while fueling a car.....just

> because you haven't

> caused an explosion yet doesn't mean it's safe!. ;-)

 

LOL. But see, the key difference here is, that unlike so many others, I'm

not smoking, while refueling my car!

Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Bill in Co. wrote:

| glee wrote:

|> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

|> news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

|>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

|>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

|>>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the

|>>>> removal of the

|>>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know

|>>>> "why")

|>>>>

|>>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go

|>>>> to the Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine

|>>>> basis. *I* have

|>>>> to do this now.

|>>>

|>>> Poor, poor Bill!

|>>>

|>>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a

|>>> bigger PIA, having to remember to compact all OE folders manually

|>>> and deleting older BAK

|>>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message

|>>> store due to

|>>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

|>>

|>> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that.

|>> Damn, I must

|>> just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just

|>> like I haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that

|>> we just can't

|>> live safely without (snort)!.

|>>

|>> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for

|>> example),

|>> didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the

|>> middle

|>> of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or

|>> whatever?

|>> Nah, can't be. :-)

|>

|> Bill, I'm sorry to say the only thing you got right in your reply

|> was the last

|> line..."Nah, can't be".

|> Multi-tasking and crashing are and were not an issue. The fact is

|> background

|> compacting created problems with corrupted message stores for many

|> users, as

|> did A-V email scanning. That doesn't mean EVERYONE had the problem.

|> Because you did not does not mean it doesn't exist, any more than the

|> remark I posted recently about smoking while fueling a car.....just

|> because you haven't

|> caused an explosion yet doesn't mean it's safe!. ;-)

|

| LOL. But see, the key difference here is, that unlike so many

| others, I'm not smoking, while refueling my car!

 

I don't do that, myself, anymore, either-- not since the price of gas

has quadrupled! But aren't you afraid your perfect record of no XP crash

yet is at risk-- if you refuse to do manual compacting? What is your

plan of action to recover from it?

 

 

--

Thanks or Good Luck,

There may be humor in this post, and,

Naturally, you will not sue,

Should things get worse after this,

PCR

pcrrcp@netzero.net

Guest Bill in Co.
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

PCR wrote:

> Bill in Co. wrote:

>> glee wrote:

>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

>>> news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the

>>>>>> removal of the

>>>>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know

>>>>>> "why")

>>>>>>

>>>>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go

>>>>>> to the Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine

>>>>>> basis. *I* have

>>>>>> to do this now.

>>>>>

>>>>> Poor, poor Bill!

>>>>>

>>>>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a

>>>>> bigger PIA, having to remember to compact all OE folders manually

>>>>> and deleting older BAK

>>>>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message

>>>>> store due to

>>>>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

>>>>

>>>> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that.

>>>> Damn, I must

>>>> just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just

>>>> like I haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that

>>>> we just can't

>>>> live safely without (snort)!.

>>>>

>>>> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for

>>>> example),

>>>> didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the

>>>> middle

>>>> of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or

>>>> whatever?

>>>> Nah, can't be. :-)

>>>

>>> Bill, I'm sorry to say the only thing you got right in your reply

>>> was the last

>>> line..."Nah, can't be".

>>> Multi-tasking and crashing are and were not an issue. The fact is

>>> background

>>> compacting created problems with corrupted message stores for many

>>> users, as

>>> did A-V email scanning. That doesn't mean EVERYONE had the problem.

>>> Because you did not does not mean it doesn't exist, any more than the

>>> remark I posted recently about smoking while fueling a car.....just

>>> because you haven't

>>> caused an explosion yet doesn't mean it's safe!. ;-)

>>

>> LOL. But see, the key difference here is, that unlike so many

>> others, I'm not smoking, while refueling my car!

>

> I don't do that, myself, anymore, either--

 

But I also quit smoking some time ago too, which helps (but even when I did,

I didn't do that, at least as I recall now).

> not since the price of gas

> has quadrupled! But aren't you afraid your perfect record of no XP crash

> yet is at risk-- if you refuse to do manual compacting?

 

I *routinely* compact as a matter of habit now (like "housekeeping"). I

also routinely like to run the Defragger, just like I did in Win98SE.

(It's kinda fun watching the squares move around on the screen, like a dumb

version of PacMan. :-)

> What is your plan of action to recover from it?

 

Well, I quite often do a system backup to my external USB HD enclosure, so

if something went wrong, I could always fall back on that. By quite

often, I'm talking about weekly, on average.

 

Actually, believe it or not, using the latest version of True Image, I can

copy some of the files from the image backup back to the source drive in

Windows Explorer, if needbe. It's a nice feature to have - to be able to

see and access files within the backup image (and by access, I mean you can

look at their properties, and make a copy of them, but not write back TO

them on the imaged drive, of course).

 

OR

 

I would try one of handful of OE dbx "recovery" shareware utility programs

that are available. But those are a bit limited in what they can do, and in

their success rate, I'm sure. But I do have one or two such programs saved

somewhere on the disk from the past.

> --

> Thanks or Good Luck,

> There may be humor in this post, and,

> Naturally, you will not sue,

> Should things get worse after this,

> PCR

> pcrrcp@netzero.net

Guest smith
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

smith <smith@nospam.com> wrote in

news:eAiOzDhwIHA.5124@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

> Brian Livingston at Windows Secrets wrote:

>

> We usually skip publication on any 5th Thursdays that come

> around (such as May 29), but serious problems involving

> Service Pack 3 for Windows XP have made us work overtime to

> bring you today's special report.

>

> http://windowssecrets.com/comp/080529

>

>

> Win 98 users thinking of finally converting with SP3 should

> monitor developments.

 

 

New screw up discovered.

 

Windows XP SP3 includes vulnerable Flash Player

Microsoft's newest update bundles older version that's currently

being exploited

 

 

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticl

eBasic&articleId=9092218&intsrc=news_ts_head

Guest PA Bear [MS MVP]
Posted

Re: Turmoil Continues in XP land

 

Bill in Co. wrote:

> glee wrote:

>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

>> news:%230J9cp4wIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

>>>> Bill in Co. wrote:

>>>>> One thing "added" by SP2 which I did NOT appreciate was the removal of

>>>>> the

>>>>> routine, automatic compacting of OE folders. (and yes, I know "why")

>>>>>

>>>>> And that now after compacting. the old uncompacted dbx files go to the

>>>>> Recycle Bin, which I then have to delete on a routine basis. *I*

>>>>> have

>>>>> to do this now.

>>>>

>>>> Poor, poor Bill!

>>>>

>>>> There's always a price to pay when it comes to OE. What's a bigger

>>>> PIA,

>>>> having to remember to compact all OE folders manually and deleting

>>>> older

>>>> BAK

>>>> files from the Recycle Bin or losing all of your entire message store

>>>> due to

>>>> corruption and not having any backups in place?

>>>

>>> Funny how (in all the years) I never had a problem with that. Damn, I

>>> must

>>> just be plain lucky, and should count my lucky stars! (Just like I

>>> haven't needed all of those so called SECURITY UPDATES, that we just

>>> can't

>>> live safely without (snort)!.

>>>

>>> Or wait! Could it be that I was a bit more careful, and, (for

>>> example),

>>> didn't try to multitask when using OE, and thus have OE crash in the

>>> middle

>>> of doing something else, like running Office, or playing WOW, or

>>> whatever?

>>> Nah, can't be. :-)

>>

>> Bill, I'm sorry to say the only thing you got right in your reply was the

>> last

>> line..."Nah, can't be".

>> Multi-tasking and crashing are and were not an issue. The fact is

>> background

>> compacting created problems with corrupted message stores for many users,

>> as

>> did A-V email scanning. That doesn't mean EVERYONE had the problem.

>> Because you did not does not mean it doesn't exist, any more than the

>> remark I posted recently about smoking while fueling a car.....just

>> because you haven't

>> caused an explosion yet doesn't mean it's safe!. ;-)

>

> LOL. But see, the key difference here is, that unlike so many others,

> I'm

> not smoking, while refueling my car!

 

No, but you're suggesting that others do so! <eg>

×
×
  • Create New...