Should I?

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.windoes-xp (More info?)

I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed W98SE
user. Wouldn't have anything else.
However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed, and
she wants to keep it.

Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been updates, at
times daily, mostly weekly.

There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally bloated.

Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long as my
W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
background.

I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.

Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
product I bought.
Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous updates
and/or fixes?
Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to be) a
lesser product?

These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to troll
for any flaming repiles.

I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.

Thanks for any advise!

John <><

 

[vanguard]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.windoes-xp (More info?)

"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
>I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an
>avowed W98SE
> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP
> installed, and
> she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
> updates, at
> times daily, mostly weekly.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of
> the
> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
> bloated.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as
> long as my
> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in
> the
> background.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully
> vulnerable
> product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the
> previous updates
> and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider
> to be) a
> lesser product?
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor
> to troll
> for any flaming repiles.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work
> well.


So, you are complaining a newer and far larger and more robust operating
system requires updates as opposed to your old and unsupported operating
system? Read http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifewin and note Windows
98 is dead hence no further updates. Windows 98 died 2 years ago,
there's no support for it, and there isn't even any extended support
(i.e., high cost option) available for it. I'm sure there are still
some old Edsels around but Ford doesn't provide parts for them, either.

As for longer loading, are you including the time right after the BIOS'
POST completes for the time for DOS to load and then adding in the time
for the Windows 98 GUI to load? Have you right-clicked on the
C:\Windows folder of your Windows 98 host to compared its size against
the C:\Windows folder of your Windows XP host? How long does it take to
load the maximum number of passengers and crew into a row boat versus
loading just the crew of an ocean liner?

The load time for a fresh install of Windows XP with no applications
installed will take longer than an install of Windows 98 with lots of
applications already installed. It takes longer to get through the
entry line at the airport due to the security check station. It takes
longer to load more files. It's a bigger operating system. You already
knew that. Could be you installed Windows XP on an underpowered
computer that barely meets the minimums. Could be malware on that host.
Could be the few applications installed on the Windows XP all want to
load something on startup and that adds to the startup time.

Is there a reason the Windows XP host cannot be put into Standby or
Hibernate mode rather than always getting completely shutdown?

--
____________________________________________________________
Post your replies to the newsgroup. Share with others.
E-mail reply: Remove "NIXTHIS" and add "#VS811" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.windoes-xp (More info?)

On 09/02/2005 John wrote:

> I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an
> avowed W98SE user. Wouldn't have anything else.


It was certainly the best of the 9x range of products.


> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully
> vulnerable product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the
> previous updates and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I
> consider to be) a lesser product?


If you have access to a CD burner then download AutoStreamer:

http://mhtools.knoware.nl/raptor/autostreamer/AutoStreamer.exe

When you run it it will ask for the original XP CD and the SP2 files.
It then merges them and creates an iso that you can burn to a CD. Use
that for your install and you will have XP SP2 with its improved
security from the word go. There may be additional updates which you
should check for.

You can speed up XP by turning off the tarty bits, Control Panel |
System | Advanced Tab | Settings. If the PC is a bit under spec for XP
that will help.


--
Jeff Gaines
Posted with XanaNews 1.17.2.4

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Underneath that GUI, Windows XP is very different from Windows 98. The only
"reasonable way to make XP work well" is to invest the time to learn how to
use it. That's what works for me.

Modem Ani

"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
> I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed
W98SE
> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed,
and
> she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
updates, at
> times daily, mostly weekly.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
bloated.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long
as my
> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
> background.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
> product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous
updates
> and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to
be) a
> lesser product?
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to
troll
> for any flaming repiles.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>
> Thanks for any advise!
>
> John <><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.windoes-xp (More info?)

Spyware/Adware/Scumware has become a major player in compromising
computers.. they introduce viruses, trojans and worms.. they attempt to send
out information about you, and they also slow your computer down..

Some basic steps to removing Spyware/Adware..

First step is to run a one shot virus remover.. I have found that McAfee
Stinger works for people.. download and run it..

http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/

You will also need to download Spyware removal software.. Spybot and Adaware
are available at these websites.. both are free.. download and run them..
don't forget to check for updates after you have started them..

http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html

http://www.lavasoftusa.com/software/adaware/

Spybot has the ability to immunize a system, but there is better for this
function, so download and run Spyware Blaster too.. again, check for
updates..

http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/

If you have had your Internet browser hijacked, that is to say, you get
redirected through a search engine NOT of your choosing, you will need
different tools..

HijackThis is a popular and effective tool.. download it from here..

http://www.spychecker.com/download/download_hijackthis.html

CWShredder will eliminate CoolWebSearch and variants.. there is a free
download here..

CWShredder.. http://www.intermute.com/spysubtract/cwshredder_download.html

For other tools in the fight against spyware, visit this website and
bookmark it..

http://www.pchell.com

You must also run a firewall and anti-virus program.. here are some links
for you..

http://www.mcafee.com .. http://www.symantec.com .. http://www.zonealarm.com
... http://www.kerio.com .. http://www.gate.com .. http://www.avast.com ..
http://www.grisoft.com ..

If SP2 update is not installed.. visit the links below.. the first tells you
how, the other three tell you why..

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

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/winxpsp2.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1724107,00.asp

OK.. all nice and clean now..

Next.. XP benefits from memory.. 512mb is the optimum amount.. the OS is
much smoother in operation.. using 'classic' view also helps greatly in
apparent speed, but somehow I think your wife probably likes the colours and
shapes of XP 'out of the box'..

Re. your own preference for W98SE, this is a common sickness among computers
users pre-XP.. were you to run XP in classic view, I doubt whether you could
tell that it was XP other than it is not hogtied by the memory and resource
limitations of its ubiquitous forebear..

For information purposes only..

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx

Please return to this thread and provide feedback.. it is the only way that
helpers here can determine how effective the advice given has been..

Good luck..


--
Mike Hall
MVP - Windows Shell/user

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





"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
>I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed
>W98SE
> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed,
> and
> she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
> updates, at
> times daily, mostly weekly.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
> bloated.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long
> as my
> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
> background.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
> product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous
> updates
> and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to
> be) a
> lesser product?
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to
> troll
> for any flaming repiles.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>
> Thanks for any advise!
>
> John <><

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 13:30:17 -0600, "Vanguard" <use_ReplyTo@domain.invalid>
wrote:

>"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
>news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...

>> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor
>> to troll
>> for any flaming repiles.
>>
>> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work
>> well.
>
>
>So, you are complaining a newer and far larger and more robust operating
>system requires updates as opposed to your old and unsupported operating
>system?

Please re-read the part of my original post which I copied above.

I'm afraid I did not find your "answer" helpful.

Thank you for trying your best, though . . . .

John <><

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 14:30:34 -0500, "Modem Ani" <notquinoas@notmyrealbox.com>
wrote:

>Underneath that GUI, Windows XP is very different from Windows 98. The only
>"reasonable way to make XP work well" is to invest the time to learn how to
>use it. That's what works for me.
>
>Modem Ani
>
Probably very good advice, but not practical in my case. I practically don't
spend any time with the machine which has XP installed, and therefor don't
really get to know the OS.
Frankly, if it were my personal machine, I would long ago have done the "Format
C" thing.

Thank you for replying!

John <><
>"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
>news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
>> I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed
>W98SE
>> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
>> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed,
>and
>> she wants to keep it.
>>
>> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
>updates, at
>> times daily, mostly weekly.
>>
>> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
>> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
>bloated.
>>
>> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long
>as my
>> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
>> background.
>>
>> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
>> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>>
>> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
>> product I bought.
>> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous
>updates
>> and/or fixes?
>> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to
>be) a
>> lesser product?
>>
>> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to
>troll
>> for any flaming repiles.
>>
>> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>>
>> Thanks for any advise!
>>
>> John <><
>

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

Thank you, Mike for the extensive reply.

The only thing I can say for sure is that (AFAIK) this machine is clean from a
virus, spyware and malware point of view.
While I do not "use" this nachine, I regularly update the McAfee AV DAT files,
and regulalry run Spybot S&D, as well as AdAware.

I will read through your reply more closely than I can do in a few minutes.

Thanks again, Mike!

John <><

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 14:39:10 -0500, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
<mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Spyware/Adware/Scumware has become a major player in compromising
>computers.. they introduce viruses, trojans and worms.. they attempt to send
>out information about you, and they also slow your computer down..
>
>Some basic steps to removing Spyware/Adware..
>
>First step is to run a one shot virus remover.. I have found that McAfee
>Stinger works for people.. download and run it..
>
>http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/
>
>You will also need to download Spyware removal software.. Spybot and Adaware
>are available at these websites.. both are free.. download and run them..
>don't forget to check for updates after you have started them..
>
>http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html
>
>http://www.lavasoftusa.com/software/adaware/
>
>Spybot has the ability to immunize a system, but there is better for this
>function, so download and run Spyware Blaster too.. again, check for
>updates..
>
>http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/
>
>If you have had your Internet browser hijacked, that is to say, you get
>redirected through a search engine NOT of your choosing, you will need
>different tools..
>
>HijackThis is a popular and effective tool.. download it from here..
>
>http://www.spychecker.com/download/download_hijackthis.html
>
>CWShredder will eliminate CoolWebSearch and variants.. there is a free
>download here..
>
>CWShredder.. http://www.intermute.com/spysubtract/cwshredder_download.html
>
>For other tools in the fight against spyware, visit this website and
>bookmark it..
>
>http://www.pchell.com
>
>You must also run a firewall and anti-virus program.. here are some links
>for you..
>
>http://www.mcafee.com .. http://www.symantec.com .. http://www.zonealarm.com
>.. http://www.kerio.com .. http://www.gate.com .. http://www.avast.com ..
>http://www.grisoft.com ..
>
>If SP2 update is not installed.. visit the links below.. the first tells you
>how, the other three tell you why..
>
>http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/winxpsp2.mspx
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx
>
>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1724107,00.asp
>
>OK.. all nice and clean now..
>
>Next.. XP benefits from memory.. 512mb is the optimum amount.. the OS is
>much smoother in operation.. using 'classic' view also helps greatly in
>apparent speed, but somehow I think your wife probably likes the colours and
>shapes of XP 'out of the box'..
>
>Re. your own preference for W98SE, this is a common sickness among computers
>users pre-XP.. were you to run XP in classic view, I doubt whether you could
>tell that it was XP other than it is not hogtied by the memory and resource
>limitations of its ubiquitous forebear..
>
>For information purposes only..
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>
>Please return to this thread and provide feedback.. it is the only way that
>helpers here can determine how effective the advice given has been..
>
>Good luck..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

John, If Service Pack 2 has not been installed, you should have Microsoft
send you the CD. It's free and so is the shipping.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/updates/sp2/cdorder/en_us/default.mspx

"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:4fsk0197o4vo3eeul6u4ed6pafa8ktn12d@4ax.com...
> Thank you, Mike for the extensive reply.
>
> The only thing I can say for sure is that (AFAIK) this machine is clean
> from a
> virus, spyware and malware point of view.
> While I do not "use" this nachine, I regularly update the McAfee AV DAT
> files,
> and regulalry run Spybot S&D, as well as AdAware.
>
> I will read through your reply more closely than I can do in a few
> minutes.
>
> Thanks again, Mike!
>
> John <><
>
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 14:39:10 -0500, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Spyware/Adware/Scumware has become a major player in compromising
>>computers.. they introduce viruses, trojans and worms.. they attempt to
>>send
>>out information about you, and they also slow your computer down..
>>
>>Some basic steps to removing Spyware/Adware..
>>
>>First step is to run a one shot virus remover.. I have found that McAfee
>>Stinger works for people.. download and run it..
>>
>>http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/
>>
>>You will also need to download Spyware removal software.. Spybot and
>>Adaware
>>are available at these websites.. both are free.. download and run them..
>>don't forget to check for updates after you have started them..
>>
>>http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html
>>
>>http://www.lavasoftusa.com/software/adaware/
>>
>>Spybot has the ability to immunize a system, but there is better for this
>>function, so download and run Spyware Blaster too.. again, check for
>>updates..
>>
>>http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/
>>
>>If you have had your Internet browser hijacked, that is to say, you get
>>redirected through a search engine NOT of your choosing, you will need
>>different tools..
>>
>>HijackThis is a popular and effective tool.. download it from here..
>>
>>http://www.spychecker.com/download/download_hijackthis.html
>>
>>CWShredder will eliminate CoolWebSearch and variants.. there is a free
>>download here..
>>
>>CWShredder.. http://www.intermute.com/spysubtract/cwshredder_download.html
>>
>>For other tools in the fight against spyware, visit this website and
>>bookmark it..
>>
>>http://www.pchell.com
>>
>>You must also run a firewall and anti-virus program.. here are some links
>>for you..
>>
>>http://www.mcafee.com .. http://www.symantec.com ..
>>http://www.zonealarm.com
>>.. http://www.kerio.com .. http://www.gate.com .. http://www.avast.com ..
>>http://www.grisoft.com ..
>>
>>If SP2 update is not installed.. visit the links below.. the first tells
>>you
>>how, the other three tell you why..
>>
>>http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/winxpsp2.mspx
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx
>>
>>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1724107,00.asp
>>
>>OK.. all nice and clean now..
>>
>>Next.. XP benefits from memory.. 512mb is the optimum amount.. the OS is
>>much smoother in operation.. using 'classic' view also helps greatly in
>>apparent speed, but somehow I think your wife probably likes the colours
>>and
>>shapes of XP 'out of the box'..
>>
>>Re. your own preference for W98SE, this is a common sickness among
>>computers
>>users pre-XP.. were you to run XP in classic view, I doubt whether you
>>could
>>tell that it was XP other than it is not hogtied by the memory and
>>resource
>>limitations of its ubiquitous forebear..
>>
>>For information purposes only..
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>>
>>Please return to this thread and provide feedback.. it is the only way
>>that
>>helpers here can determine how effective the advice given has been..
>>
>>Good luck..
>

 

[pop]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

John wrote:
>I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an
> avowed W98SE user. Wouldn't have anything else.
===> Only from the ignorant and narcissistic.

> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP
> installed, and she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
> updates, at times daily, mostly weekly.
===> Not quite that many, but a LOT, especially if you don't have SP2.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of
> the original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become
> totally bloated.
===> SP2 replaced a lot, but not most <g>.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as
> long as my W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly)
> running in the background.
===> Sounds like maybe adware, spyware, malware, etc.. Are you protected
from same? a la AdAware, spybot, etc.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
===> If you're not sure what to do that might be fastest. Read on.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully
> vulnerable product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the
> previous updates and/or fixes?
===> Yes. Get SP2 from Microsoft. IT's free and if you order the CD they
even pay the shipping. Right now you need SP2 and I think about 4 other
fixes that followed SP2. SP2 includes EVERYTHING prior to its release, so
you won't need those pre-SP2 fixes.

> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I
> consider to be) a lesser product?
===> If you can hold off, order the SP2 CD or, if you're on a digital modem,
you can download it too. Or you can download and automatically install it
also.
Turn on windows Update and keep her machine up to date; they're lots
easier to take in small bites. SP2 was nearly a hundred Meg by the time it
was all done and installed. 15 hours on a dialip <g>.
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor
> to troll for any flaming repiles.
===> YO're gonna get 'em. Just ignore them & let the callouses get thicker.
Knowitalls are a dime a dozen in today's world.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work
> well.
SP2, hotfixes, all automatically available thru Windows Update, a good
antivirus, a firewall, and anti spyware software. That's not 'cause it's
XP: ALL machines are subject to these problems.
>
> Thanks for any advise!
===> Luck!

Pop
PS YOu had a spelling erorr; this only went to this group
--
---
No, I won't get dressed.
I'm retired!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers,alt.windoes-xp (More info?)

Your wife is getting updates, and you aren't, because your operating system
has been retired. Unless something extremely serious comes along, you will
not likely SEE any more updates for it.

Now, do you really think that yours is better than the O/S on your wife's
computer? Don't be delusional now!

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
>I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed
>W98SE
> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed,
> and
> she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
> updates, at
> times daily, mostly weekly.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
> bloated.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long
> as my
> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
> background.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
> product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous
> updates
> and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to
> be) a
> lesser product?
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to
> troll
> for any flaming repiles.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>
> Thanks for any advise!
>
> John <><

 

[george]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

John,

I'm kind'o curious why you are a convinced and frequent 'updater' of the 3rd
party add-ons you mention, but are questioning the need for updating the
underlying OS as MS approach to problems with the 'outside world' evolves?
You should be happy this happens and that they at least try and make an
effort to weed out problems that inevitably exist is any product of this
size.
The fact that other OSses seem to have less problems is decieving.
They also do not have the mainstream attention and widespread use that MS
products have.
This means that it is far less lucrative to invest time in finding exploits
and abusing existing bugs, because once found the potential damage that
could be done is only to a proportionally small slice of the computing using
pie.

my 2c

george


"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:4fsk0197o4vo3eeul6u4ed6pafa8ktn12d@4ax.com...
> Thank you, Mike for the extensive reply.
>
> The only thing I can say for sure is that (AFAIK) this machine is clean
> from a
> virus, spyware and malware point of view.
> While I do not "use" this nachine, I regularly update the McAfee AV DAT
> files,
> and regulalry run Spybot S&D, as well as AdAware.
>
> I will read through your reply more closely than I can do in a few
> minutes.
>
> Thanks again, Mike!
>
> John <><
>
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 14:39:10 -0500, "Mike Hall \(MS-MVP\)"
> <mike.hall.mail@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Spyware/Adware/Scumware has become a major player in compromising
>>computers.. they introduce viruses, trojans and worms.. they attempt to
>>send
>>out information about you, and they also slow your computer down..
>>
>>Some basic steps to removing Spyware/Adware..
>>
>>First step is to run a one shot virus remover.. I have found that McAfee
>>Stinger works for people.. download and run it..
>>
>>http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/
>>
>>You will also need to download Spyware removal software.. Spybot and
>>Adaware
>>are available at these websites.. both are free.. download and run them..
>>don't forget to check for updates after you have started them..
>>
>>http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html
>>
>>http://www.lavasoftusa.com/software/adaware/
>>
>>Spybot has the ability to immunize a system, but there is better for this
>>function, so download and run Spyware Blaster too.. again, check for
>>updates..
>>
>>http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/
>>
>>If you have had your Internet browser hijacked, that is to say, you get
>>redirected through a search engine NOT of your choosing, you will need
>>different tools..
>>
>>HijackThis is a popular and effective tool.. download it from here..
>>
>>http://www.spychecker.com/download/download_hijackthis.html
>>
>>CWShredder will eliminate CoolWebSearch and variants.. there is a free
>>download here..
>>
>>CWShredder.. http://www.intermute.com/spysubtract/cwshredder_download.html
>>
>>For other tools in the fight against spyware, visit this website and
>>bookmark it..
>>
>>http://www.pchell.com
>>
>>You must also run a firewall and anti-virus program.. here are some links
>>for you..
>>
>>http://www.mcafee.com .. http://www.symantec.com ..
>>http://www.zonealarm.com
>>.. http://www.kerio.com .. http://www.gate.com .. http://www.avast.com ..
>>http://www.grisoft.com ..
>>
>>If SP2 update is not installed.. visit the links below.. the first tells
>>you
>>how, the other three tell you why..
>>
>>http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/spackins.htm
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/maintain/winxpsp2.mspx
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx
>>
>>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1724107,00.asp
>>
>>OK.. all nice and clean now..
>>
>>Next.. XP benefits from memory.. 512mb is the optimum amount.. the OS is
>>much smoother in operation.. using 'classic' view also helps greatly in
>>apparent speed, but somehow I think your wife probably likes the colours
>>and
>>shapes of XP 'out of the box'..
>>
>>Re. your own preference for W98SE, this is a common sickness among
>>computers
>>users pre-XP.. were you to run XP in classic view, I doubt whether you
>>could
>>tell that it was XP other than it is not hogtied by the memory and
>>resource
>>limitations of its ubiquitous forebear..
>>
>>For information purposes only..
>>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx
>>
>>Please return to this thread and provide feedback.. it is the only way
>>that
>>helpers here can determine how effective the advice given has been..
>>
>>Good luck..
>

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 21:44:28 -0500, "Crusty \(-: Old B@stard :-\)"
<richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Your wife is getting updates, and you aren't, because your operating system
>has been retired. Unless something extremely serious comes along, you will
>not likely SEE any more updates for it.
>
>Now, do you really think that yours is better than the O/S on your wife's
>computer? Don't be delusional now!

In this news group I'll never get agreement, I understand. (-:
However, the cold hard facts are that my ASUS P III (800 MHZ) computer is a
whole heck-of-a-lot faster in almost every way than her Compaq P IV (2433 MHZ,
according to Belarc Advisor, although that seems a bit much . . ).
The only thing I can see that would possibly account for this difference is that
I have 384 meg of memory, and she has 128 meg only.

According to Belarc Advisor, her OS is XP Home Service Pack 2 (build 2600).

Guess I'll have to see if I have some compatible memory in my parts box
somewhere, or go out and buy 256 meg.

Thanks, all, for your willingness to help!
It shows me that Windows XP people are every bit as friendly and helpful as W 98
people!

Happy Valentine's Day, y'all!

John <><

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 17:44:29 -0800, "Chuck Davis" <newsgroup at anthemwebs dot
com> wrote:

>John, If Service Pack 2 has not been installed, you should have Microsoft
>send you the CD. It's free and so is the shipping.
>http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/updates/sp2/cdorder/en_us/default.mspx
>

According to Belarc Advisor, her OS is XP Home Service Pack 2 (build 2600).

John <><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

In news:8ivm01178660tf1eeb7m7f9naree9sh1lp@4ax.com,
John <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> typed:


> However, the cold hard facts are that my ASUS P III (800 MHZ)
> computer is a whole heck-of-a-lot faster in almost every way
> than her
> Compaq P IV (2433 MHZ, according to Belarc Advisor, although
> that
> seems a bit much . . ).
> The only thing I can see that would possibly account for this
> difference is that I have 384 meg of memory, and she has 128
> meg only.


I missed the beginning of this thread, but it's by no means
surprising that her machine with only 128MB is slower than yours,
even though it has a faster processor. How much RAM you need
depends on what apps you run, but just about everybody needs at
least 256MB for decent performance. And the lack of RAM causes
you to page more, and paging involves I/O, which is a physical
process (unlike electronic access to RAM), and the slowest thing
your computer does.

I'd rather run XP with a slow processor and 256MB than a fast one
and only 128MB any day. Upgrade her to at least 256MB and you
should see her machine run faster than yours.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup

 

[Gordon]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

John wrote:
> However, the cold hard facts are that my ASUS P III (800 MHZ) computer is a
> whole heck-of-a-lot faster in almost every way than her Compaq P IV (2433 MHZ,
> according to Belarc Advisor, although that seems a bit much . . ).
> The only thing I can see that would possibly account for this difference is that
> I have 384 meg of memory, and she has 128 meg only.
>

Most people recommend at LEAST 256 MB RAM for XP, and the optimum memory
requirement for XP (either flavour) would seem to be 512 MB....put it up
to that and then see which one is faster!




--
Interim Systems and Management Accounting
Gordon Burgess-Parker
Director
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 16:16:53 +0000, Gordon <gordonbp1@yahoo.co.uk.invalid>
wrote:

>John wrote:
>> However, the cold hard facts are that my ASUS P III (800 MHZ) computer is a
>> whole heck-of-a-lot faster in almost every way than her Compaq P IV (2433 MHZ,
>> according to Belarc Advisor, although that seems a bit much . . ).
>> The only thing I can see that would possibly account for this difference is that
>> I have 384 meg of memory, and she has 128 meg only.
>>
>
>Most people recommend at LEAST 256 MB RAM for XP, and the optimum memory
>requirement for XP (either flavour) would seem to be 512 MB....put it up
>to that and then see which one is faster!

Hey, since memory is cheap - why not.

I'll see, and report back here.

John <><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

The updates are what keeps it running smoothly.


XP is no different from Win98 - Win98 will get and need equally as many
updates as any other OS.

SP2 (Jan 2005) for XP has all the fixes and patches (including those in SP1)
since the release of the OS

What are the specs of your wife's computer? The minimum Microsoft
recommends is Pentium III 500 mhtz, with 256 meg ram. any less, and it is
likely to suffer performance wise.


"John" <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote in message
news:bdmk015q02iqj5rpr42phc74u8cbugk65r@4ax.com...
>I know I stand to get some flak, but let me first of all say I'm an avowed
>W98SE
> user. Wouldn't have anything else.
> However, my wife's computer (about one year old) has Windows XP installed,
> and
> she wants to keep it.
>
> Seems to me that ever since we bought her machine, there have been
> updates, at
> times daily, mostly weekly.
>
> There nust be so many updates on her computer that either nothing of the
> original OS is left, or else (and I think so) it has become totally
> bloated.
>
> Booting up and shutting down the machine takes three or four times as long
> as my
> W98 machine... Yet, she has very few programs (knowingly) running in the
> background.
>
> I'm thinking of removing and re-installing the OS on her machine.
> That way, it will be clean as of the date of purchase.
>
> Question: If I do that, i'm back to the original, frightfully vulnerable
> product I bought.
> Is there an update (or perhaps two) that would include all the previous
> updates
> and/or fixes?
> Or do I just have to continue to see her strugle with (what I consider to
> be) a
> lesser product?
>
> These questions are not meant to antagonize faithfull XP lovers, nor to
> troll
> for any flaming repiles.
>
> I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>
> Thanks for any advise!
>
> John <><

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 17:52:53 +0800, "Andrew Murray" <admurray@iinet.net.au>
wrote:

>The updates are what keeps it running smoothly.
>
>
>XP is no different from Win98 - Win98 will get and need equally as many
>updates as any other OS.
>
>SP2 (Jan 2005) for XP has all the fixes and patches (including those in SP1)
>since the release of the OS
>
>What are the specs of your wife's computer? The minimum Microsoft
>recommends is Pentium III 500 mhtz, with 256 meg ram. any less, and it is
>likely to suffer performance wise.

According to Belarc Advisor, it is a Compaq P IV (2433 MHZ, although that
seems a bit much . . ).
The only thing I can see that would possibly account for the difference
difference is that I have 384 meg of memory, and she has 128 meg only.

According to Belarc Advisor, her OS is XP Home Service Pack 2 (build 2600).

Guess I'll have to see if I have some compatible memory in my parts box
somewhere, or go out and buy 256 meg.

Thanks for your input!

John <><

 

[john]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 13:55:55 -0500, John <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> wrote:

Most text deleted

>I merely want to know if there's a reasonable way to make XP work well.
>
>Thanks for any advise!
>
>John <><

THANKS to who helped me out.

In final analysis, the problem appeares to have been not enough RAM.
I put in another 256K in addition to the original 128K, and the improvement is dramatic.

Until this point, this machine was exactly as it was sold to me .
Just wonder now why they would sell such an inadequately equipped machine (except, perhaps, to make
the price sound good - in which case they could at least have informed me that additional RAM would
be a MUST).

Anyway, THANKS AGAIN, all!

John <><

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers (More info?)

In newsj9v01djgn19lujhjfdqvte2dmiqijqogl@4ax.com,
John <nus998XXX@XXXpobox.com> typed:

> In final analysis, the problem appeares to have been not enough
> RAM.
> I put in another 256K in addition to the original 128K, and the
> improvement is dramatic.
>
> Until this point, this machine was exactly as it was sold to me
> .
> Just wonder now why they would sell such an inadequately
> equipped
> machine (except, perhaps, to make the price sound good -


That's why. They want to be able to advertise a low price.


> in which
> case they could at least have informed me that additional RAM
> would
> be a MUST).


It isn't quite a "must." Although personally, I wouldn't want to
run with only 128MB and I wouldn't recommend such a system, there
*are* people who do it and are reasonably satisfied with the
results. How successful it is has a lot to do with what
applications you run.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup