Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The XP SP2 Horror to come.

Last response: in Computer Brands
Share
August 18, 2004 12:51:27 AM

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

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.

More about : sp2 horror

Anonymous
August 18, 2004 6:02:25 AM

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

Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
changing just one little word
What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently"
What you wrote "will work "differently""

At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words
"may" and "will".
May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have
reported.

You would make an interesting journalist.

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


"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.
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 8:00:20 AM

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

Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" to imply that they encountered
anomalous behavior of the program at least under SOME (not all) conditions
running XP2. You or I may or may not encounter the same behavior depending on
how we use such a program? No matter how one parses it or interprets it, 200
programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before installing
SP2 and then to tread carefully.

Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service pack
designation. Given past history with Microsoft operating systems, one should go
forward carefully with a major release. Actually, DOS 6.2 was pretty much free
of problems... Ben Myers

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com>
wrote:

>Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
>changing just one little word
>What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently"
>What you wrote "will work "differently""
>
>At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words
>"may" and "will".
>May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have
>reported.
>
>You would make an interesting journalist.
>
>--
>Jupiter Jones
>http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>
>
>"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.
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 8:53:52 AM

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

I never heard anyone, at least not someone with any computer
experience, suggest a Service pack is anything but a major release.
Also much of what Microsoft publishes shows Microsoft considers SP-2 a
major release.
Otherwise there would not be near as much information about SP-2.

A restore Point is always a good idea before any major change, not
just Service Packs.
But many use them improperly.
Many are already uninstalling SP-2 at the first sign of trouble
ignoring the possibility there is a simple fix already arranged from
Microsoft or the application or hardware vendor.

So far my experiences are less issues with SP-2 than SP-1
However that depends greatly on the prior maintenance of the computer.

Most problems will have simple fixes.
But I still hear of people formatting the computer Microsoft messed up
because they can no longer get attachments because "OE has removed
access..." after getting a bunch of updates.
The easy but long solution many take is to blame Microsoft and either
format or uninstall which in itself is another major change.
When the correct solution is usually easy to locate.

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


<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:4122d32e.38758656@news.charter.net...
> Microsoft wrote "may behave differently" to imply that they
> encountered
> anomalous behavior of the program at least under SOME (not all)
> conditions
> running XP2. You or I may or may not encounter the same behavior
> depending on
> how we use such a program? No matter how one parses it or
> interprets it, 200
> programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before
> installing
> SP2 and then to tread carefully.
>
> Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service
> pack
> designation. Given past history with Microsoft operating systems,
> one should go
> forward carefully with a major release. Actually, DOS 6.2 was
> pretty much free
> of problems... Ben Myers
>
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
> <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
>>changing just one little word
>>What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently"
>>What you wrote "will work "differently""
>>
>>At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words
>>"may" and "will".
>>May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have
>>reported.
>>
>>You would make an interesting journalist.
>>
>>--
>>Jupiter Jones
>>http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
>>
>>
>>"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.
>>
>>
>
August 18, 2004 1:05:45 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

>Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
>changing just one little word
>What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently"
>What you wrote "will work "differently""
>
>At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words
>"may" and "will".
>May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have
>reported.

And just like Bill Clinton, you took attention away from the article
in point by debating what the meaning if "is" is.

>You would make an interesting journalist.

And you would make a great politician the way you dodge the content
and detour the subject matter away from what you don't like.

BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's. I
pasted it here because I thought people would be interested in
following the links instead of making a big deal out of what the
meaning of "is" is....

Now back to the actual point of the readings that were supplied in the
links given (if you even read them)......

Sorry if all this steps on your love affair with MS but hey, sorry to
burst your bubble but the profound revolation is.... I didn't code
this mess, I just posted what I had read about the mess. If that
hurts your feelings and you have to resort to detouring away from the
subject by debating the meaning of what "is" is.... then get a job in
politics where you would undoubtedly be a pro.

Tell you what, let the ones interested in the article and links debate
the actual substance and you can create a side bar crying and whining
about what the meaning of "is" is....
August 18, 2004 1:54:07 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:00:20 GMT, ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net
(Ben Myers) wrote:

>No matter how one parses it or interprets it, 200
>programs is a bunch, enough for people to set a restore point before installing
>SP2 and then to tread carefully.

Yes Ben, it did seem to miss that point while debating what the
meaning of "is" is, didn't it...

But you are right that 200 possible is (or should be) a concern. A
lot of my programs are listed there. Some other articles linked to
from the MS NG's stated that a lot of tests had shown that restore
would not take you back to "exactly" the condition you were in before
implementing the upgrade. There were even instances where restore
failed all together resulting in the need for a complete restoration
of the system.

From what I gather by following all the links and articles... most of
the problem is with the firewall in SP2. It seems from what I have
read that turning the firewall off after installation will not get
things back to normal and MS coded this thing to install with the
firewall turned on by default...

>Given past history with Microsoft operating systems, one should go
>forward carefully with a major release.

Unless you blindly go into it while sidetracked in a discussion about
what the meaning of "is" is.... Sorry, had to throw that in because
people like that are so transparent and funny.... Anyway... you are
right about the history of such companies. But like politicians and
governments, no one learns from history... thus to repeat it.

Now to a MS argument I read about this mess of which also has some
merit to MS's credit.... He said that OS's evolve and programs that
operate under evolving OS's must also evolve along with them in order
to stay compliant (compatible). Okay... I buy that.... BUT! You
don't just throw a new evolution to an OS out there before other major
players have had time to conform their products. Remember, MS's own
Office products are even having compatibility problems with this
release. In other words, MS itself hasn't even had time to make all
its own applications compliant with the new release.

Another link stated that Norton has a fix for their suit of
applications but has put a warning out that you MUST install the fix
before installing SP2 because you can't back up later and make it
work. If you install SP2 and then try to do the FIX, you are dead in
the water and even a "Rollback" will not save you. A complete
restoration of the system will be needed. Problem..... You will only
know this if you visit certain sections of the Symantec site or hear
it second hand.... I think it was about Norton SystemWorks mostly but
do know that my version of NAV2003 will not be compliant and Norton is
only fixing all 2004 versions of their stuff to be compliant. So, if
I install this mess, I would be forced to pay the bucks to move from
NAV 2003 to 2004 when 2003 was working just fine before the SP2
debacle. And that's just one program....

I added up what it would cost me to become compliant with SP2 if all
my application on the list of 200 did in fact fail to work. I quit
counting after seeing the cost of moving from Office Pro 2000 to the
version that will (in the future) be fixed to be compliant with SP2
(it is my understanding that they haven't even started making the
latest Office compliant yet because they don't know why it is having
trouble with SP2).

Which brings up another point.... MS is pushing you, on their upgrade
page, to turn ON automatic download and install of upgrades so you
don't miss getting SP2. In the face of what problems could come of
this installation, I can't believe MS is actually suggesting people
turn their upgrade option to Automatic download and Install.... Well,
as you said... looking at their history... Yes I can!

After all I have read, I think the prudent thing would be to hide and
watch on this one. AND!!!! DO NOT turn on Automatic Download and
Install of Upgrades as suggested by MS. because History shows that MS
doesn't always know what's best.....

Regards,
TR
August 18, 2004 3:01:58 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:00:20 GMT, ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net
(Ben Myers) wrote:

>Others have stated that SP2 is a major release, despite its service pack
>designation.

From http://channelzone.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,1759,161323...

"Microsoft has a history of major releases with understated names, and
Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) is no exception."

Regards,
TR
August 18, 2004 3:10:36 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:54:07 -0400, TR <fakeaddress@forspammers.com>
wrote:

> DO NOT turn on Automatic Download and
>Install of Upgrades as suggested by MS.

From http://www.teamits.com/start/winxpsp2.php

Warning: Windows XP Service Pack 2
TO: ALL ITS CLIENTS

FROM: Steve, John, Amy, Simon

What follows is a copy of a recent ITS news release you may have seen
suggesting that businesses postpone their download of Microsoft’s
Service Pack 2 security fix for Windows XP, officially named " Windows
XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies." While ITS
applauds the increased security levels available with SP2, the news
release encompasses our concerns about this “fix,” and following is
information regarding specific programs that are known to have issues
with SP2.

Windows XP can be configured to automatically download and install all
"critical updates" from Microsoft, which will include SP2. Below are
instructions for disabling this download. Note this entire issue only
applies to PCs running Windows XP.

View the ITS press release
http://www.teamits.com/start/winxpsp2_pr.php
Small Businesses Urged to Postpone Microsoft XP Security ‘Fix’.
August 18, 2004 3:18:00 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

>Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
>changing just one little word

From one of the links posted in the message that you indubitably never
followed much less read:

"Now major applications including Microsoft’s own packages will act
differently when the new service pack is installed onto a PC running
Windows XP."

The are called links.... the way it works is that you follow them.
But then, you have to read them also. Now, if you did the first two
things, and by a small twist of fate, you comprehend what you were
suppose to follow and read, then you would see where the actual source
of what was said came from and you wouldn't have made such a
blundering ass out of yourself.....
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 8:42:21 PM

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

You now find it necessary to be insulting because I see a difference
in "will" & "may".
I didn't "dodge" anything, I pointed out the bias in your post.
The same type of bias found many places with a bias against Microsoft.

Your excuse "copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's" shows little
validity on your part.
Quotes are normally appropriate if you desire others to know it is not
your own.
Quotes around one word does not say much in this case especially when
no reference is given.

I have read the articles, that is why I noticed the obvious error, how
did you miss the error?
If you think "will" is the same as "may", fine, but by posting, you
invite comments and then cry and insult when you get a correction.
Once you read the articles and do a little more research you may
discover that many computers have no issues at all so "may" as used is
correct.
This newsgroup as many others is not exclusively for your bias, you
invited comments and you got one.

You also have this in another post:
"From http://channelzone.ziffdavis.com/article2/0,1759,161323...
"Microsoft has a history of major releases with understated names, and
Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) is no exception." "
Where does Microsoft state SP-2 is not a major release?
I doubt it is said anywhere...except by Microsoft critics.
Microsoft would probably not publish so much about a minor release.

The fact you need to insult as well as make irrelevant comparisons to
Clinton is further evidence of your true position.
So it seems anyone that disagrees with you has a "love affair with MS"
and needs to be beaten by you so that you can prove you are correct.
It fails miserably unless you wanted to show this ego need of yours.

Perhaps if you could stick to facts, you could have something
worthwhile to say, but apparently your facts are insults.

Good bye TR, You clearly have little of value to pass on about this
subject.
Don't bother posting back unless you are actually posting to others.

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


"TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
news:m5k6i0ps697l95m2aron7p4d3tmh074pmd@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 02:02:25 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
> <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:
>
>>Interesting how you changed the meaning of Microsoft's article by
>>changing just one little word
>>What Microsoft wrote "may behave differently"
>>What you wrote "will work "differently""
>>
>>At least to me, there is a significant difference between the words
>>"may" and "will".
>>May means just that, you may not have any troubles as many have
>>reported.
>
> And just like Bill Clinton, you took attention away from the article
> in point by debating what the meaning if "is" is.
>
>>You would make an interesting journalist.
>
> And you would make a great politician the way you dodge the content
> and detour the subject matter away from what you don't like.
>
> BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted from one of the MS NG's.
> I
> pasted it here because I thought people would be interested in
> following the links instead of making a big deal out of what the
> meaning of "is" is....
>
> Now back to the actual point of the readings that were supplied in
> the
> links given (if you even read them)......
>
> Sorry if all this steps on your love affair with MS but hey, sorry
> to
> burst your bubble but the profound revolation is.... I didn't code
> this mess, I just posted what I had read about the mess. If that
> hurts your feelings and you have to resort to detouring away from
> the
> subject by debating the meaning of what "is" is.... then get a job
> in
> politics where you would undoubtedly be a pro.
>
> Tell you what, let the ones interested in the article and links
> debate
> the actual substance and you can create a side bar crying and
> whining
> about what the meaning of "is" is....
August 18, 2004 8:42:22 PM

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

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:42:21 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

I insult because you don't know how to follow a simple link which was
PROVIDED in order to see and read and comprehend that what you blamed
me of saying was in fact what I was conveying from the link that
someone else had said. That's why the link was provided... DUH! So,
until you understand how following links works, don't stick your foot
in your mouth next time. Best way I know of how to keep from being
"Insulted". Read (and try to understand) all you are provided before
running off at the mouth....

If that is too complicated for you... lets go over it one more time.

Someone provides information they read on the Internet. Along with
that, they provide the links to where they got the information. Now,
as the reader, you are suppose to poses the intelligence to follow the
link in order to confirm that what the writer is telling you was said,
was in fact what was said. Now, if you disagree with what was said,
then you go to the person provided in the link as the original author
and have your little spat with them, NOT the one that was simply
conveying what was said/written by another as confirmed by the link
provided.

Now, if that is still over your head as to how it works... I'm sorry
because I can't make it any simpler for you. Maybe have your Mommy
try to explain it to you cause I don't have the patience for your
stupidity in such a simple thing as following the link provided to
confirm who really said what and who was just the messenger of what
was said.

What an idiot!
August 18, 2004 10:03:23 PM

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

The links you gave in your message were evident to me tr and I also
appreciate you bringing this to my attention because I had no idea
there was a problem and had done as microsoft had suggested by putting
my computer on automatic for the upgrade. I reversed that.

One word of advice though tr, even though most people understand how
links work and that anyone following the links you gave would see
immediately that you were writing what the person in the link had
said, you must show patience for those that don't understand how links
work. I can understand how one could loose their temper with those
but a gentler approach at educating them might bear more fruit in the
end.

Again, thanks for posting all this information on this sp2 and the
problems that seem to surround it. It looks as thought microsoft
wasn't going to make any statements about the problems before an
unknowing population installed the darned thing.

You know, I think I am starting to distrust them. Millie
August 18, 2004 11:33:10 PM

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

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.
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 6:00:39 AM

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

Millie;
Looking back I see where I missed something.
In his second post he said "BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted
from one of the MS NG's..."
From then I was thinking the original statement was from the newsgroup
post.
But by that time his insults were flying fast.

Articles like that are bad journalism.
The writer changed a small word which significantly changed the
meaning from the source document without justifying their change.

By changing the word, the writer has unjustifiably increased the
paranoia about something many need to do at some point.

I learned a long time ago that when a person feels the need to shore
up the position with name calling and anger, the strength of their
point of view has already been exhausted.
I have said as much whether the person supported my point of view or
not.
Anger and name calling typically hurts the one using it more than
anyone else, it certainly does nothing to me.

Lastly, directly and indirectly I have posted that link and several
more directly related to SP-2 more than 50 times since his first post
on this subject yesterday, easily more than 300 times since I
installed SP-2 on 9 August.

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


"Millie" <millie4@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:1456e68d.0408181703.33f3fb13@posting.google.com...
> The links you gave in your message were evident to me tr and I also
> appreciate you bringing this to my attention because I had no idea
> there was a problem and had done as microsoft had suggested by
> putting
> my computer on automatic for the upgrade. I reversed that.
>
> One word of advice though tr, even though most people understand how
> links work and that anyone following the links you gave would see
> immediately that you were writing what the person in the link had
> said, you must show patience for those that don't understand how
> links
> work. I can understand how one could loose their temper with those
> but a gentler approach at educating them might bear more fruit in
> the
> end.
>
> Again, thanks for posting all this information on this sp2 and the
> problems that seem to surround it. It looks as thought microsoft
> wasn't going to make any statements about the problems before an
> unknowing population installed the darned thing.
>
> You know, I think I am starting to distrust them. Millie
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 6:18:30 AM

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

Well said Jupiter.

--
"Hurricane" Andrew
Milford, DE

Jupiter Jones wrote:
> Millie;
> Looking back I see where I missed something.
> In his second post he said "BTW, the whole thing was copied and pasted
> from one of the MS NG's..."
> From then I was thinking the original statement was from the newsgroup
> post.
> But by that time his insults were flying fast.
>
> Articles like that are bad journalism.
> The writer changed a small word which significantly changed the
> meaning from the source document without justifying their change.
>
> By changing the word, the writer has unjustifiably increased the
> paranoia about something many need to do at some point.
>
> I learned a long time ago that when a person feels the need to shore
> up the position with name calling and anger, the strength of their
> point of view has already been exhausted.
> I have said as much whether the person supported my point of view or
> not.
> Anger and name calling typically hurts the one using it more than
> anyone else, it certainly does nothing to me.
>
> Lastly, directly and indirectly I have posted that link and several
> more directly related to SP-2 more than 50 times since his first post
> on this subject yesterday, easily more than 300 times since I
> installed SP-2 on 9 August.
August 19, 2004 3:32:17 PM

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

On 18 Aug 2004 18:03:23 -0700, millie4@adelphia.net (Millie) wrote:

>The links you gave in your message were evident to me tr

Glad to hear that. They were hard to miss weren't they (all colored
differently, underlined and with a big fat http:// sitting at the
front)?

>appreciate you bringing this to my attention because I had no idea
>there was a problem and had done as microsoft had suggested by putting
>my computer on automatic for the upgrade. I reversed that.

That was the purpose of the original post and of course, the original
links so the attuned could see that this was NOT original to me but
was being posted around the Internet by others and posted on certain
PC publications. Of course, the link clueless took attention away
from the purpose of the post and got into a semantic thing with a
person that was nothing more than the messenger of what was being said
and posted around the web.

>One word of advice though tr, even though most people understand how
>links work and that anyone following the links you gave would see
>immediately that you were writing what the person in the link had
>said

Yep, sort of stuck right there in the open for anyone with a clue to
see and follow.

>you must show patience for those that don't understand how links
>work.

Patience toward those that don't react falsely because of not having a
clue to how links work is fine but when they react and post falsely
because of not having a clue as to how to follow the links PROVIDED
for conformation of/from the source of what was said.... then they
need to be insulted. I have no tolerance for those types what so
ever.

>Again, thanks for posting all this information on this sp2 and the
>problems that seem to surround it. It looks as thought microsoft
>wasn't going to make any statements about the problems before an
>unknowing population installed the darned thing.

They do have a history of doing such... I see that today my
auto-update warning told me that SP2 was ready for download. Of
course, due to MS's sorted history, I am going to hide and watch
before jumping on this one. Maybe wait for SP2.12345 to come out and
that list of 200 non-compatibles to go down (grin).

>You know, I think I am starting to distrust them. Millie

They don't have a track record supportive of trusting do they?

I did read on the ZoneLabs Forum (makers of Zone Alarm Firewall), that
some suggest downloading SP2 but NOT to install it yet. Then
disconnect from online and halt all firewalls, AV's, PopUp blockers,
Ad/Spyware watchers and other background processes going on. Next,
install sp2t and then turn off all its features. Then reconnect to
online and reboot.

Well, why install it in the first place if you are going to do it that
way? I'm not the smartest guy in town even though I do know how and
when to follow a provided link, but this seems to be canceling the
purpose of installing it in the first place.

Following some other forums this morning, I see that there are those
that let it install and have seen no negative side effects what so
ever from it while others are reporting everything from a single
application going down to whole systems going down. One of my
engineers said he just got off the phone with a friend that said their
AutoCad went down after installing SP2 while another office running
the same version of AutoCad is doing fine after the SP2 install.

I guess that's what scares me the most about this thing.... It would
appear from what I am reading that no one, not even MS knows what the
effects will be on any single or collective set of systems or
applications. Why does A's Widget program go down while B's Widget
program is un effected?

I think what is going on.... AND... this is what I am saying so those
Link Challenged types out there can actually flame me for what I say
from this spot forward because it is '*** What I Think ***'.... I
think MS has been under such pressure to finally do something about
all their security holes that they have "Rushed" to release what they
perceive to be the fix or all fixes, SP2, before it has been
thoroughly tested and before a lot of questions about all these
application clashes with it have been properly addressed.

Regards,
TR
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 9:23:12 PM

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

See below...

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:32:17 -0400, TR <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote:

<SNIP>
>Glad to hear that. They were hard to miss weren't they (all colored
>differently, underlined and with a big fat http:// sitting at the
>front)?

Um, some of us still adhere to the usenet text-only conventions, which guarantee
that any news reader can read a news item. The prettied up text outlining the
URL just does not show up in some news readers, mine included. But I have
learned to read key words like http:// .

<SNIP #2>

>I guess that's what scares me the most about this thing.... It would
>appear from what I am reading that no one, not even MS knows what the
>effects will be on any single or collective set of systems or
>applications. Why does A's Widget program go down while B's Widget
>program is un effected?

Yes! Yes! Yes! Been that way since Windows 95 hit the streets, and the
ever-more-complex and inscrutable Windows environment has left Micro$oft more
clueless.

>
>I think what is going on.... AND... this is what I am saying so those
>Link Challenged types out there can actually flame me for what I say
>from this spot forward because it is '*** What I Think ***'.... I
>think MS has been under such pressure to finally do something about
>all their security holes that they have "Rushed" to release what they
>perceive to be the fix or all fixes, SP2, before it has been
>thoroughly tested and before a lot of questions about all these
>application clashes with it have been properly addressed.

You betcha. They rushed this one to market, just like all the others were
rushed to market... Ben Myers


>
>Regards,
>TR
August 19, 2004 9:23:13 PM

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

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:23:12 GMT, ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net
(Ben Myers) wrote:

>But I have
>learned to read key words like http:// .

That's why I always make a "rich text" link also show as the "Plain
Text" characterization of the actual link so everyone can see it one
way or the other (click on it or copy & paste it).

>and the
>ever-more-complex and inscrutable Windows environment has left Micro$oft more
>clueless.

Ever hear the term "Running on a Hope and a Prayer"? Just trying to
keep the whole conglomerate afloat until everyone can cash in and hit
the sunny beaches of Island-Retire.

>They rushed this one to market, just like all the others were
>rushed to market

Just got back from a visit to the people that made my latest computer.
Besides from making custom systems to order, they also offer three
house units already made up in three different colors (9 systems in
all) which are sitting proudly in their store front window.

Around noon, he said he decided to go on and upgrade all nine to SP2.
Good for 7 so far, questionable for 1 and very bad for 1. One lost
all control over NAV2004, giving errors on bootup and refusing to open
NAV to check configuration. A clean uninstall of NAV2004 did not keep
the bootup errors from popping up even though the system would boot
just without any virus protection. Then the worse case was the one
that would not boot back up after the installation. It locks dead up
between the time the XP splash screen goes off and the desktop image
comes up (during the brief moment of black between the two). No error
messages. He said they are going through the error logs on C: after
booting in safe mode but have found nothing as to why this has
happened. He said they will probably have to do a full restoration
and try to do the SP2 again and see because the XP restore would not
get it back to where it was before the upgrade for some reason.

So.... you tell me.... out of the nine computers, you got three sets
of three computers that are identical in every way except for color of
case and one computer of the single sets of three bombs while the
other two of the same set doesn't upon installation of SP2.

Regards,
TR
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 10:22:40 PM

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

>>Re: The XP SP2 Horror to come.
> You betcha. They rushed this one to market, just like all the others were
> rushed to market... Ben Myers
>

You can't bitch too bad about the perfidy of Microsoft, because there
are other software options out there. It's not like they actually have
a monopoly. You could get off your lazy fat ass and learn to use a
real operating system.
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 7:19:44 AM

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

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.

Thank yov for yovr opinion, troll... Ben Myers

On 19 Avg 2004 18:22:40 -0700, samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams) wrote:

>>>Re: The XP SP2 Horror to come.
>> Yov betcha. They rvshed this one to market, jvst like all the others were
>> rvshed to market... Ben Myers
>>
>
> Yov can't bitch too bad abovt the perfidy of Microsoft, becavse there
>are other software options ovt there. It's not like they actvally have
>a monopoly. Yov covld get off yovr lazy fat ass and learn to vse a
>real operating system.
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 10:39:40 AM

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 about the operating system I WROTE
from
> scratch for the GE-225 computer back in the mid-1960's? Instead of
reading all
> programs from punched cards as done previously, 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 enough for you?
>

Ben,

Thought I recognized your name! Just couldn't place you until the above
post. Sorry 'bout that (CRAFT disease, don'cha know). <bg> Glad to see
you're still in there kicking, guy! I've only been in the biz since '79-'80
(COCO I & II). BASIC wasn't too bad, but had a little trouble with COBOL &
FORTRAN.

Louie
Gainesville, FL, USA


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/04
August 20, 2004 1:46:46 PM

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

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
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 5:46:24 PM

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

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.
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 7:16:18 PM

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

No, but Microsoft is daily limiting the number of computers getting
SP-2 through Automatic Update.
The computer may get SP-2 now or it could be a few days.
Interactive Update is not due available until 25 August.
So all is normal and as expected.

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


"TR" <fakeaddress@forspammers.com> wrote in message
news:2ivbi0lgo2db3fsqihvikooupv98cr201j@4ax.com...
>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
August 20, 2004 7:16:19 PM

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

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:16:18 GMT, "Jupiter Jones"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:

>No, but Microsoft is daily limiting the number of computers getting
>SP-2 through Automatic Update.
>The computer may get SP-2 now or it could be a few days.
>Interactive Update is not due available until 25 August.
>So all is normal and as expected.

My computer store friend told me he found this out from another store
owner later this morning. Anyway, he also was given a URL to a MS
site where the whole 266meg "IT" form of SP2 could be downloaded (I
think this is what he called it).

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyI...

Anyway, he downloaded it and tried it on the system that had gone
completely down with the SP2 update that had come through the AU
method and this time the install caused no problems (after a complete
restoration). No indication why the first installation caused a
complete system meltdown.

The system that was updated and had NAV2004 go south is still a
problem and he says as it looks right now, will need a complete
restoration and second try at sp2 also.

And the other 7 systems that were updated via AU have yet to show any
problems....

I turned AU back off and downloaded the 266meg file just to have it.
I am still going to hold off until the air clears on this one.

Thanks for the information on why AU is holding off for some..... I
guess they have to do that in order to keep the bandwidth at a
reasonable.... "width"....

Regards,
TR
August 20, 2004 7:16:19 PM

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
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 9:19:55 PM

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-KB...

Note: Link may wrap

Cheers
August 20, 2004 9:19:56 PM

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-KB...

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?FamilyI...

Regards,
TR
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 11:05:28 PM

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
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 2:03:36 AM

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.
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 4:13:25 AM

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
August 21, 2004 7:10:36 AM

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

samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams) scribbled some garbage about a
problem in news:D 792394d.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.

(:

--
( ,&&&.
) .,.&&
( ( \=__/
) ,'-'.
( ( ,, _.__|/ /|
) /\ -((------((_|___/ |
( // | (`' (( `'--|
_ -.;_/ \\--._ \\ \-._/.
(_;-// | \ \-'.\ <_,\_\`--'|
( `.__ _ ___,') <_,-'__,'
`'(_ )_)(_)_)'
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 2:47:42 PM

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.
August 21, 2004 5:26:25 PM

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.
>
>
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 7:06:27 PM

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'.
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 7:16:44 PM

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.
Anonymous
August 21, 2004 11:33:23 PM

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.
>>
>>
>
>
August 22, 2004 10:50:55 PM

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

samdotbyrams@hotmail.com (Sam Byrams) scribbled some garbage about a
problem in news:D 792394d.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

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