IE Running well so far

  • Thread starter Thread starter CdLSRN
  • Start date Start date
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.

Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or even
VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't and is
concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow its
designs, and force the use of its OSs.

XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.
Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
waiting a month or never, to have something fixed. Wouldn't you rather have
manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft. Wouldn't you
rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect you
[with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the comparison
is negated].
Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding, yet just
about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you support
a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their own?

Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports to
be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...

Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster called
Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the error
reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost the
files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the parties who
brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for doing so,
did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am I, ah
yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which I PAY
to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret.... no
matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world needed [it
was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has, per my
own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers. That
it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is something I
can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this group, I
will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
completely do.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:uLSizKVwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:O7NB9RUwIHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > Let's just end this with a fact:
| >
| > Microsoft is attempting to foster open source for its proposed newer
| > operating systems... think you can guess WHY... and that pretty much
ends
| > any debate about just how good XP and Vista are....
|
| Don't be obtuse. That's about as ridiculous a piece of logic as you've
| launched all day. IF MS is trying to coopt the open source community
(which
| is what you claim amounts to), it's because they can't come up with what
| they WANTED Vista to be, a whole new OS with a whole new file system and
| everything else that everyone, including me, knows are weak points in
2K/XP.
|
| Whereas the "debate" we *were* having, until you changed it again, was one
| of comparative OSes that NOW EXIST. I never claimed that XP was the cat's
| meow, that it doesn't need replacing, and teh sooner the better. It's just
a
| LOT better than Windows 9x in almost all respects, and, for the mass
| consumer, the only reasonable choice available. (Careful, well-off persons
| might choose Mac, instead, especially since they made it run Windows
| decently, but only geeks run Linux distros.)
|
| Doesn't mean I think XP is bad, either. I've been using XP since before
RTM
| and for a lot of various types of real work, using lots of major apps and
| minor apps, updating, etc., etc. There have been some stumbles, but
nothing
| so catastrophic as I'd regularly run into using Win9x, nor as frequent,
etc.
| I have an abiding appreciation for XP's robustness and breadth of possible
| functionality compared to 9x, based upon real use. Lastly, like I said, I
| used them both for real work, and didn't have time to figure out anything
of
| the Linux flavor.
|
| I learned 98 when I was disabled and living in a tiny travel trailer. Once
I
| found them in the beginning of '99, I had time to participate in the
groups,
| tear 98 apart, try all kinds of apps, all kinds of cinfigurations, some
| hardware changes, even ran a virus just to see what it did, to report to
| this group. I used my 98 Upgrade CD, purchased the day it came out, to
| reinstall my P200 system many hundreds of times in just a few short
months.
| Etc., etc. But then I had to go back to work, and didn't have time for
much
| of that (relatively). And now my brain doesn't work well enough to learn.
No
| retention. Which is why I haven't even moved to supporting XP. Not
qualified
| and not up to becoming so.
|
| Once I get a bit more on my feet (maybe next winter), I'll see how Linux
has
| matured. Last time I tried it (before XP came out) every distro I tried
was
| a misrerable failure. I don't want to HAVE to build the entire OS from
| scratch, practically, just to get my machine running. Didn't even get to
| find out if I could get real work done on them. (I was in the publishing
| business. Lots of graphics work. I also made money building Access apps
and
| other odd but very demanding projects.) So, you think any of the distros
are
| going to make me happy? Will any of them run Photoshop? (No, there is NO
| replacement for Photoshop!)
|
| > Sorry not really in this type of debating mood at the moment, still
stuck
| > in Legal mode [local and distant]...
|
| Sorry, you started it. You want it finished, just stop replying. As for
the
| legal blah blah, best wishes.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:uHaakITwIHA.3968@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > |
| > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | news:e39giUSwIHA.3484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | >
| > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > news:O6TJ5MPwIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | news:OWeKt3OwIHA.516@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:%23k1oCnOwIHA.516@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | > | Windows XP is no more a POS than 98. I don't use Vista so I
| > can't
| > | > | > comment,
| > | > | > | but I imagine it's the same thing, though I tend to think of
| > Vista
| > | > as
| > | > | > XP's
| > | > | > | ME. As for your hardware argument, that's total BS. Windows 98
| > lost
| > | > it's
| > | > | > | market share (dropped into the low single-digits) long before
| > new
| > | > | > hardware
| > | > | > | stopped supporting it.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | People LIKE operating systems that just work. Windows XP is
and
| > | > always
| > | > | > has
| > | > | > | been more robust than 98. That's why IT people like it (go
| > ahead,
| > | > show
| > | > | > me
| > | > | > a
| > | > | > | survey of IT's where 98 is compared favorably with other
| > systems.)
| > | > | > That's
| > | > | > | why home users and SOHO users and everyone else like XP. As
for
| > | > | > security,
| > | > | > | the only difference between now on XP and then on 98 is in the
| > | > details.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > IT goes for what's EASY to use, what seems to be hot, and are
just
| > as
| > | > | > easily mislead as any other party.
| > | > | > Just as the home user THOUGHT they were getting a much more
secure
| > | > system,
| > | > | > so did IT. Just as the home user doesn't want to spend much time
| > | > learning
| > | > | > how to use a computer, so does IT.
| > | > | > The relational charcturistics between home and IT or other
| > | > professionals
| > | > | > runs parallel. Look on the one hand at IT trying to secure their
| > | > systems,
| > | > | > and the other; the web development department attempting to
create
| > new
| > | > | > ways
| > | > | > to garner more information via script and other... how smart is
| > this.
| > | > |
| > | > | And your point is? What you describe is how it's always been, and
in
| > | > fact
| > | > I
| > | > | DO say that XP makes ALL of those tasks easier. And what makes you
| > think
| > | > | that IT or home users consider Security the main consideration
when
| > | > | purchasing a new system? If they know anything, they know it's a
| > | > constant
| > | > | battle no matter what system you're using, particularly if it's
the
| > OS
| > | > that
| > | > | has 80% of the market and makes such a nice big target. They rely
| > upon
| > | > MS
| > | > | and third parties to protect their systems. If they are just as
| > savvy
| > in
| > | > | other things, they'll never have to deal with malware. I certainly
| > | > don't,
| > | > | and only one or two recalcitrants amongst my clientelle have any
| > serious
| > | > | problems with their XP systems once I give them "the talk". On the
| > other
| > | > | hand, I have a few 9x clients left, and they are STILL calling me
| > every
| > | > few
| > | > | months, asking if I can come and clean up some mess.
| > | >
| > | > Due to>>>> their improper use, same for XP. Because they can't take
| > the
| > | > time to learn what they are doing..
| > | > I referenced what was occurring years ago {1992} its called
| > Stupification
| > | > [yeah that's mis-spelled.
| > |
| > | Why should every car driver be a mechanic (I shudder to think...)
Should
| > | every eater also be a full time farmer? What chaos! Computers are
| > | appliances, nothing more. They feed the needs of society, not the
| > reverse.
| > | They just need to work in the real world, and only the *heavily*
| > restricted
| > | Apple offerings do that better than Windows PCs.
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | > The market you reference, showing usage reflects only that
people
| > CAN
| > | > be
| > | > | > convinced to use products which they actually know nothing
about,
| > just
| > | > | > because its easier to use and happens to be widely accepted, and
| > | > hardware
| > | > | > support has NOT been provided in the previous OS, though much of
| > it
| > | > could
| > | > | > have been by simple updates.... so it isn't necessarily a
| > | > | > better/easier/just
| > | > | > works OS, its a forced upgrade to get what you want or think you
| > need,
| > | > or
| > | > | > does some more setup FOR YOU.
| > | > |
| > | > | Blah, blah. The consumer market tends to buy what's new when they
| > look
| > | > for
| > | > | replacements after a few years of using the old one. That's
| > capitalism
| > | > for
| > | > | you, not a reasonable comparison of OSes. Again, that's the way
it's
| > | > always
| > | > | been, and Luddite is the term for people who refuse to
participate.
| > | > Wanna
| > | > be
| > | > | a Luddite, OK, but the above is a false argument if you're
comparing
| > the
| > | > | OSes on their own merits. When it comes to a decision between XP
and
| > 98
| > | > (and
| > | > | I'm talking about when XP first came out): Hardware support and
| > | > installation
| > | > | is a snap. BSODs are rare, (yes, even in those early days.) After
| > the
| > | > | nightmares in Win9x and NT4 (even Win2K) up to that point in time,
| > just
| > | > | those two items probably sold half the units. The whole point is
| > that
| > | > for
| > | > | most people, they can run Windows without any major problems, with
| > about
| > | > as
| > | > | much learning involved as most people can stand, and the support
is
| > | > second
| > | > | only to Apple. People who don't trust Windows use Apple, which has
| > its
| > | > own
| > | > | multitude of drawbacks. Just who is going to support your Linux
| > distros.
| > | >
| > | > DUUUUUUUHHHHH, the people who work with it, write the drivers,
produce
| > the
| > | > applications,, THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD... seems that's like in here
| > and
| > on
| > | > the XP and VISTA suport forums, only in those Linux groups you're
| > likely
| > | > discussing the issues with the actual programmer [error, okay wait
| > minute
| > | > I
| > | > think I know what needs changed,,, okay try this and see if that
| > corrects
| > | > the issue *or* that particular chip has a bug in it, I can't fix it
| > | > without
| > | > breaking others, but here's a work around Bob worked out which
| > addresses
| > | > it].......
| > |
| > | Have you ever learned the concept of scale? What happens when your
| > distro
| > | writer gets sick, or just sick of people, or even dead? I know, you'll
| > say
| > | that if the distro has "legs" it will develop a decent cadre of people
| > | willing to help with it, but will there also be an ever widening
circle
| > of
| > | happy *programmers* ready to do the same? Or will we pay them via
| > PayPal?
| > |
| > | The Linux concept may some day mature (though I personally think it
has
| > some
| > | fatal flaws), but that day is still far off. Until then, Windows is
it.
| > |
| > | > SO where's your ludite comparison now... in the toilet... being one
of
| > the
| > | > cattle has never been my strong suit.
| > |
| > | Luddite is the perfect word. Your entire spiel brings to mind
| > clippety-clop
| > | music and horse & carriage, though nicely pastoral, scenes (I'm an
| > American,
| > | after all). Whether you "moo" or not is up to you.
| > |
| > | > And YEEEEAAAAHHHHHH, they can *barely* run Windows, until they mess
| > | > something up, or Microsoft breaks something in one of is updates [as
| > | > usual]///// and then we try to help, like we like to do.
| > |
| > | If you lived in the real world, you'd know that you just reaffirmed my

| > | entire thesis. IME, once they learn the basics, MOST people don't need
| > much
| > | programming/hardware help with their Windows XP systems. Not from
other
| > | people. Certainly not as much as they need(ed) with Win9x, by orders
of
| > | magnitude. And, again by orders of magnitude, not nearly as much as
any
| > | other OS -- except Mac, because you pay through the nose for
stability.
| > |
| > | > | > If they actually knew much or had an actual desire to learn,
| > they'd
| > be
| > | > | > using one of the Linux clones or other OS. Were it not for the
| > DEEP
| > | > | > relationship with manufacturers that Microsoft now has, Windows
| > | > wouldn't
| > | > | > be
| > | > | > anywhere near the usage level that it is; between the two
FORCING
| > | > Windows
| > | > | > usage
| > | > |
| > | > | Hey, you seem to know a lot. Why are you using Windows? You've got
| > so
| > | > many
| > | > | other choices and you already KNOW that all versions of Windows
are
| > POS.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | >
| > | > Right, the usual "well you're running Windows" so STF, but I also
ran
| > | > Linux, Xenix, and several other OSs... but I suppose I'm supposed to
| > be
| > a
| > | > mindless Windows junky, blindly following the masses, lauding the
| > VIRTUES
| > | > of
| > | > the newest release or whatever is the supposed best version. Don't
you
| > see
| > | > the comparison to what's occurring now,,, the resistence to move to
| > VISTA,
| > | > the spouting of the VALUE of XP as it draws near to support end, its
| > | > already
| > | > marked for death,,, how can you FAIL to see the comparison to 98 and
| > what
| > | > occurred... what then, spouting how VISTA is now the OS of
choice,the
| > | > super
| > | > sophisicated, unfailingly superior,, or maybe the new Version 7,,
| > yep...
| > | > ride that train, or stand back and look at what is occurring
| > |
| > | Hey, I just figured you'd have much better places to be. Where you
could
| > | help other users with your *preferred* OS/distro. Sheesh! My question
| > was
| > | serious: If Windows is such a POS in general, why do you devote so
much
| > time
| > | to it? Now that I think about it, and from what you've said, I can't
| > believe
| > | you actually run it. You wouldn't be that, er, imprudent. But...
| > then....
| > |
| > | Vista will be passed over much like ME, and for much the same reasons,
| > | though perhaps with a better numbers showing than ME, even in relative
| > | terms. It's a mongrel. Can't really DO anything that XP can't, and
what
| > they
| > | DID add that isn't just eye-candy, what they actually did at the
system
| > | level, they did very poorly, and I'm not talking about the kinds of
| > things
| > | you fix with a patch or even an SP. XP Professional can certainly
handle
| > | basic hardware developments for some time to come.
| > |
| > | The next Windows system will, as I said, have to be an entirely new
| > | paradigm. If it can't be that, we may as well stay with WinXP or
switch
| > | provider altogether. But any replacement for Microsoft will have to
deal
| > | with scale and capitalism* as well as Microsoft. Got any candidates?
| > |
| > | (*Mass capitalism, where "easy" and "convenient" are the ruling
| > paradigms,
| > | not "cheap" and certainly not "quality". In fact, now that I think
about
| > it,
| > | your notions are more than a little communistic, and while I won't
| > debate
| > | you capitalism vs. communism (we'd probably agree too much to make the
| > | conversation worth it), we live in a raw, capitalistic world.)
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > |
| > | > | > | As for security, the main issues involve IE and OE and if
Win9x
| > was
| > | > | > | supported, they'd be getting just as many patches. As for
other
| > | > things
| > | > | > that
| > | > | > | needed fixing, 9x had just as many in relative terms.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Look, ANY argument that compares OS security and DOESN'T take
| > into
| > | > | > account
| > | > | > | market share, the "biggest bang for the buck" operational
theory
| > of
| > | > | > malware
| > | > | > | writers, etc., is pure sophistry.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | And you didn't deny my original premise, did you?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > It wouldn't do any good, but I can see you would be willing to
| > defend
| > | > your
| > | > | > position, I knew you would ;-]..
| > | > | >
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | --
| > | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | > | news:%23l7eJaOwIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| > | > | > | > QT can be used locally, or one can find codex to handle that
| > | > format
| > | > in
| > | > | > | > some
| > | > | > | > other player which IS being supported.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > Right, you DO say that constantly, and you also attempt to
| > foster
| > | > the
| > | > | > | > notion that XP has become the world's favorite because its
| > just
| > so
| > | > | > good
| > | > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > secure, BS, the reason for increased usage is that it is
| > difficult
| > | > to
| > | > | > find
| > | > | > | > computer's to support 9X, leaving the only viable Windows
| > choice
| > | > as
| > | > | > XP,
| > | > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > VISTA is still such a PITA. Try not to buy into the garbage
| > spewed
| > | > by
| > | > | > | > media
| > | > | > | > and others... OR if you wish, we CAN discuss the POS XP
which
| > I
| > | > DID
| > | > | > spend
| > | > | > | > considerable time testing and monitoring... how good its,,,
| > look
| > | > HERE:
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480/en-us
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > Think everything is fixed,,, guess again...
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > _________
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > _________
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > news:uKoNOPOwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | > | > | I already told you, that machine has had EVERYTHING
| > installed
| > on
| > | > it
| > | > | > at
| > | > | > | > one
| > | > | > | > | time or another, and been through several ISPs and their
| > | > | > | > branding/helpful
| > | > | > | > | software, etc.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | But what should she do if she needs QT to play something?
| > After
| > | > all,
| > | > | > | > what
| > | > | > | > | you say about QT on Windows 98 could be said about Win98
| > itself.
| > | > In
| > | > | > | > fact,
| > | > | > | > I
| > | > | > | > | say it fairly regularly in places where people might
| > actually
| > | > | > listen.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | --
| > | > | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > | news:uzyZhGOwIHA.1504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | > | > | > | > Apple's QuickTime for 98 has not been supported for some
| > time.
| > | > It
| > | > | > is
| > | > | > a
| > | > | > | > | > security risk, and is severely outdated.
| > | > | > | > | > Unless you have some special need to use it online, do
not
| > | > allow
| > | > | > it
| > | > | > | > access
| > | > | > | > | > to the Internet.
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > Are you using AOL or some other ISP which installed this
| > for
| > | > you?
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > | > _________
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > "Tim Slattery" <Slattery_T@bls.gov> wrote in message
| > | > | > | > | > news:fa1r3490ic78jqm9d8p4mkkvf84r0rcg82@4ax.com...
| > | > | > | > | > | "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote:
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > | >Could someone please tell me what Quick Time is?
Sygate
| > | > says
| > | > it
| > | > | > was
| > | > | > | > | > critical that I
| > | > | > | > | > | >had approved a whole bunch of new dlls for Quick
Time,
| > and
| > | > I
| > | > | > don't
| > | > | > | > even
| > | > | > | > | > remember what
| > | > | > | > | > | >it is. Ginny
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > | QuickTime is Apple's video player. It plays *.mov and
| > *.mp4
| > | > | > files,
| > | > | > | > | > | which Windows Media Player will not. Installing it
will
| > also
| > | > get
| > | > | > you
| > | > | > | > | > | endless nags from Apple to upgrade it and iTunes
| > (whether
| > | > you
| > | > | > have
| > | > | > | > | > | iTunes or not).
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > | --
| > | > | > | > | > | Tim Slattery
| > | > | > | > | > | MS MVP(Shell/User)
| > | > | > | > | > | Slattery_T@bls.gov
| > | > | > | > | > | http://members.cox.net/slatteryt
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > --
| > | > _________
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|
 
Re: IE Running well so far

You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if you're
missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got stashed away
on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98 machines
that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus the ones
I personally collected at various times through the years...

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee, pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
>
> But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
> iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was removed..
> cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
> available
> [which many are not], and check to see if they were outdated/superceded.
> Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do this as
> well..
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it was.
> |
> | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been installed
> on
> a
> | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a link
> that
> | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes me want
> to
> | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to actually do
> it,
> | but just a little.
> |
> | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> |
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then 02-09-06
> four
> | > months prior to end.
> | >
> | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several other
> updates
> | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
> | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
> superceded
> | > or
> | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
> | >
> | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> offering,
> | > it
> | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally included. The
> | > INFs
> | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was what I got
> | > when
> | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future use. Be
> | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering. Or was
> that
> | > what you used?
> | >
> | > --
> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > --
> | > _________
> | >
> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
> | > |
> | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any particular
> | > write-up
> | > | by MS to be complete.
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > |
> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
> | > | >
> | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update, here's
> | > excerpts
> | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note the
> date}:
> | > | >
> | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> | > Service
> | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | > | >
> | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
> | > | > (KB823353)
> | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in Microsoft
> | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security updates
> | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this page.
> | > | >
> | > | > Quick Info
> | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
> | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
> | > | > Version:OE6
> | > | >
> | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | > | > English
> | > | >
> | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
> | > | >
> | > | > System Requirements
> | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
> | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
> | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
> | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1)
> | > | > with the following operating systems:
> | > | >
> | > | > Windows XP SP1
> | > | > Windows XP
> | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
> | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
> | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
> | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
> | > | > ------
> | > | >
> | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also saved with
> the
> | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above information.:
> | > | > Compare to the below date.
> | > | >
> | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the < have been
> | > removed}:
> | > | >
> | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
> | > | > identity
> | > | >
> | >
> itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
> | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
> | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
> | > | > language>en</language>
> | > | > /identity>
> | > | > description hidden="0">
> | > | > descriptionText>
> | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
> | > | > (KB823353)</title>
> | > | > eula href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
> | > | > details href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
> | > | > /descriptionText>
> | > | > /description>
> | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
> | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
> | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
> | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
> | > | > /platform>
> | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
> | > | >
> <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
> | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
> | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
> | > | > </itemStatus>
> | > | >
> | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update debacle.}
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > --
> | > | > _________
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if you're
| missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got stashed
away
| on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98 machines
| that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus the
ones
| I personally collected at various times through the years...
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee, pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
| >
| > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
| > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
removed..
| > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
| > available
| > [which many are not], and check to see if they were outdated/superceded.
| > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do this
as
| > well..
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it was.
| > |
| > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
installed
| > on
| > a
| > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a link
| > that
| > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes me
want
| > to
| > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to actually do
| > it,
| > | but just a little.
| > |
| > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > |
| > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then 02-09-06
| > four
| > | > months prior to end.
| > | >
| > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several other
| > updates
| > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
| > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
| > superceded
| > | > or
| > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
| > | >
| > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > offering,
| > | > it
| > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally included.
The
| > | > INFs
| > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was what I
got
| > | > when
| > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future use.
Be
| > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering. Or
was
| > that
| > | > what you used?
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > --
| > | > _________
| > | >
| > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
| > | > |
| > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any particular
| > | > write-up
| > | > | by MS to be complete.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > |
| > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update, here's
| > | > excerpts
| > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note the
| > date}:
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express
6
| > | > Service
| > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
| > | > | > (KB823353)
| > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in Microsoft
| > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
updates
| > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this page.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Quick Info
| > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
| > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
| > | > | > Version:OE6
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | > | > English
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
| > | > | >
| > | > | > System Requirements
| > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
| > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
| > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
| > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1)
| > | > | > with the following operating systems:
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Windows XP SP1
| > | > | > Windows XP
| > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
| > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
| > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
| > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
| > | > | > ------
| > | > | >
| > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also saved
with
| > the
| > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above information.:
| > | > | > Compare to the below date.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the < have been
| > | > removed}:
| > | > | >
| > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
| > | > | > identity
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
| > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
| > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
| > | > | > language>en</language>
| > | > | > /identity>
| > | > | > description hidden="0">
| > | > | > descriptionText>
| > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
| > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
| > | > | > eula href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
| > | > | > details href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
| > | > | > /descriptionText>
| > | > | > /description>
| > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
| > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
| > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
| > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
| > | > | > /platform>
| > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
| > | > | >
| > <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
| > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
| > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
| > | > | > </itemStatus>
| > | > | >
| > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update debacle.}
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > _________
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time


"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23bI12MdwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.


Hey, I'm just looking at the numbers.

> Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or even
> VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't and
> is
> concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
> uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow its
> designs, and force the use of its OSs.


Again, the story is in the numbers -- FACTS. And again, capitalism is a
FACT. The vast uninformed society is a FACT. Apple's upper-level quality
(and price) are FACTS. Microsoft's predatory practices are FACTS. I don't
dispute that "the world is moving", but it's moving at a snail's pace toward
something nobody can yet foresee.

> XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.


Means a heck of a lot to me and everyone who uses it!

> Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
> waiting a month or never, to have something fixed.


No. I would not want my machine used as a test box every day.

>Wouldn't you rather have
> manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft.


Work with users in what way? I'd rather the hardware and the OS code got
along, thank you, and I don't think it should be the OS getting changed
every day in order to keep up with every whim of every hardware developer
out there, much less the hardware manufacturers' "users". Again, you are
describing chaos.

>Wouldn't you
> rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect you
> [with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the comparison
> is negated].


Where do you get these "thousands of code-knowledgeable people"? And how am
I supposed to choose who to listen to? No, now that I think abou tit, the
LAST thing I want is a bunch of "code-knowledgeable people" helping me. I
want other USERS helping me. I want the code people to busy themselves
keeping the code in good order and I want them to ALL BE ON THE SAME TEAM!

> Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding, yet
> just
> about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you
> support
> a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their own?


No, I never wondered that. I knew the answer without having to actually ask
the question. It's akin to a law of nature. But you imply that the other
OSes are hack proof, or inherently less insecure, that they are without
faults in logic, without vulnerabilities just as nasty as the ones you
bemoan in WIndows, and that's a crock.

And you still don't get it -- I have no big attachment to XP other than it's
what gets the job done for me and none of the others could come close. My
only other observation is that XP/Vista appear to be maintaining their
share, or losing it at a snails pace at worst, and that this is due to basic
capitalism. Microsoft, or anyone who seeks to replace them, need a brand new
bag altogether, but I prefer the current state of affairs to the chaos you
describe.

> Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
> desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports to
> be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...


How is it that you keep seeing me as "fighting" for XP/Vista/whatever? I
have no dog in this fight. I just want the winner when the dust settles. For
the last several years, that's been Windows XP and now this mongrel Vista.

> Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster called
> Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the error
> reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost the
> files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the parties
> who
> brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for doing
> so,
> did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am I, ah
> yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which I PAY
> to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret.... no
> matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
> environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world needed
> [it
> was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
> environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has, per
> my
> own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers. That
> it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is something
> I
> can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this group, I
> will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
> completely do.


As PA Bear implied, you tend toward the Quixotic. I don't care about your
theories and academic opinions, your howling in the night. Your worldview is
at odds with reality.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its still
showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates 9X?

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if you're
| | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got stashed
| away
| | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
machines
| | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus the
| ones
| | I personally collected at various times through the years...
| |
| | --
| | Gary S. Terhune
| | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | www.grystmill.com
| |
| | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee, pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
| | >
| | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
| | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
| removed..
| | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
| | > available
| | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
outdated/superceded.
| | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do this
| as
| | > well..
| | >
| | > --
| | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | > --
| | > _________
| | >
| | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it
was.
| | > |
| | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
| installed
| | > on
| | > a
| | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a link
| | > that
| | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes me
| want
| | > to
| | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to actually
do
| | > it,
| | > | but just a little.
| | > |
| | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
| | > |
| | > | --
| | > | Gary S. Terhune
| | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | > | www.grystmill.com
| | > |
| | > |
| | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
02-09-06
| | > four
| | > | > months prior to end.
| | > | >
| | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several other
| | > updates
| | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
| | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
| | > superceded
| | > | > or
| | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
| | > | >
| | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| | > offering,
| | > | > it
| | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally included.
| The
| | > | > INFs
| | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was what I
| got
| | > | > when
| | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future
use.
| Be
| | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering. Or
| was
| | > that
| | > | > what you used?
| | > | >
| | > | > --
| | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | > | > --
| | > | > _________
| | > | >
| | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
| | > | > |
| | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
particular
| | > | > write-up
| | > | > | by MS to be complete.
| | > | > |
| | > | > | --
| | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| | > | > |
| | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update,
here's
| | > | > excerpts
| | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note the
| | > date}:
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
Express
| 6
| | > | > Service
| | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service Pack
1
| | > | > | > (KB823353)
| | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in Microsoft
| | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
| updates
| | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this page.
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Quick Info
| | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
| | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
| | > | > | > Version:OE6
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
| | > | > | > English
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > System Requirements
| | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
| | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
| | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
| | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1 (SP1)
| | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
| | > | > | > Windows XP
| | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
| | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
| | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
| | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
| | > | > | > ------
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also saved
| with
| | > the
| | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
information.:
| | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the < have
been
| | > | > removed}:
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
| | > | > | > identity
| | > | > | >
| | > | >
| | >
|
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
| | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
| | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
| | > | > | > language>en</language>
| | > | > | > /identity>
| | > | > | > description hidden="0">
| | > | > | > descriptionText>
| | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
| | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
| | > | > | > eula href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
| | > | > | > details href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
| | > | > | > /descriptionText>
| | > | > | > /description>
| | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
| | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
| | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
| | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
| | > | > | > /platform>
| | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
| | > | > | >
| | > <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
| | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
| | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
| | > | > | > </itemStatus>
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update debacle.}
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | > --
| | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | > | > | > --
| | > | > | > _________
| | > | > | >
| | > | > | >
| | > | > |
| | > | >
| | > | >
| | > |
| | >
| | >
| |
|
|
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Also the FAQ shows this:

Are Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, or Windows Millennium Edition
critically affected by any of the vulnerabilities that are addressed in this
security bulletin?
No. None of these vulnerabilities are critical in severity on Windows 98, on
Windows 98 Second Edition, or on Windows Millennium Edition.



--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its still
| showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates 9X?
|
| --
| MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| --
| _________
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
| |
| | --
| | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | --
| | _________
| |
| | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if you're
| | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
stashed
| | away
| | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
| machines
| | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus the
| | ones
| | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
| | |
| | | --
| | | Gary S. Terhune
| | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | www.grystmill.com
| | |
| | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
| | | >
| | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
| | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
| | removed..
| | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
| | | > available
| | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
| outdated/superceded.
| | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do
this
| | as
| | | > well..
| | | >
| | | > --
| | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | > --
| | | > _________
| | | >
| | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it
| was.
| | | > |
| | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
| | installed
| | | > on
| | | > a
| | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a
link
| | | > that
| | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes
me
| | want
| | | > to
| | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
actually
| do
| | | > it,
| | | > | but just a little.
| | | > |
| | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
| | | > |
| | | > | --
| | | > | Gary S. Terhune
| | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | > | www.grystmill.com
| | | > |
| | | > |
| | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
| 02-09-06
| | | > four
| | | > | > months prior to end.
| | | > | >
| | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several
other
| | | > updates
| | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
| | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
| | | > superceded
| | | > | > or
| | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
| | | > | >
| | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| | | > offering,
| | | > | > it
| | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
included.
| | The
| | | > | > INFs
| | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was what
I
| | got
| | | > | > when
| | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future
| use.
| | Be
| | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering.
Or
| | was
| | | > that
| | | > | > what you used?
| | | > | >
| | | > | > --
| | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | > | > --
| | | > | > _________
| | | > | >
| | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
| | | > | > |
| | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
| particular
| | | > | > write-up
| | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
| | | > | > |
| | | > | > | --
| | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| | | > | > |
| | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update,
| here's
| | | > | > excerpts
| | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note
the
| | | > date}:
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
| Express
| | 6
| | | > | > Service
| | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service
Pack
| 1
| | | > | > | > (KB823353)
| | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
Microsoft
| | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
| | updates
| | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this
page.
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Quick Info
| | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
| | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
| | | > | > | > Version:OE6
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
| | | > | > | > English
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > System Requirements
| | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
| | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
| | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
| | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
(SP1)
| | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
| | | > | > | > Windows XP
| | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
| | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
| | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
| | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
| | | > | > | > ------
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also saved
| | with
| | | > the
| | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
| information.:
| | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the < have
| been
| | | > | > removed}:
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
| | | > | > | > identity
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | >
| | | >
| |
|
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
| | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
| | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
| | | > | > | > language>en</language>
| | | > | > | > /identity>
| | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
| | | > | > | > descriptionText>
| | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
| | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
| | | > | > | > eula href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
| | | > | > | > details
href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
| | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
| | | > | > | > /description>
| | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
| | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
| | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
| | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
| | | > | > | > /platform>
| | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
| | | > | > | >
| | | > <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
| | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
| | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
| | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update debacle.}
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | > --
| | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| | | > | > | > --
| | | > | > | > _________
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > | >
| | | > | > |
| | | > | >
| | | > | >
| | | > |
| | | >
| | | >
| | |
| |
| |
|
|
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Did I say it says anywhere that Win9x is "supported"? If I did, I was
mistaking it with another quite similar download yesterday, one of the MSXML
patches (thought it turns out the second one of those didn't install on 9x.)

All I know is that it works, so I gotta figure it's called censorship of the
literature.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its still
> showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates 9X?
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
> |
> | --
> | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | --
> | _________
> |
> | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if you're
> | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
> stashed
> | away
> | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
> machines
> | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus the
> | ones
> | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
> | |
> | | --
> | | Gary S. Terhune
> | | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | www.grystmill.com
> | |
> | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
> pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
> | | >
> | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
> | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
> | removed..
> | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
> | | > available
> | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
> outdated/superceded.
> | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do
> this
> | as
> | | > well..
> | | >
> | | > --
> | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | > --
> | | > _________
> | | >
> | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it
> was.
> | | > |
> | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
> | installed
> | | > on
> | | > a
> | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a
> link
> | | > that
> | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes
> me
> | want
> | | > to
> | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
> actually
> do
> | | > it,
> | | > | but just a little.
> | | > |
> | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
> | | > |
> | | > | --
> | | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | > | www.grystmill.com
> | | > |
> | | > |
> | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
> 02-09-06
> | | > four
> | | > | > months prior to end.
> | | > | >
> | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several
> other
> | | > updates
> | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
> | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
> | | > superceded
> | | > | > or
> | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
> | | > | >
> | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | | > offering,
> | | > | > it
> | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
> included.
> | The
> | | > | > INFs
> | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was what
> I
> | got
> | | > | > when
> | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future
> use.
> | Be
> | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering.
> Or
> | was
> | | > that
> | | > | > what you used?
> | | > | >
> | | > | > --
> | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | > | > --
> | | > | > _________
> | | > | >
> | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
> | | > | > |
> | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
> particular
> | | > | > write-up
> | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
> | | > | > |
> | | > | > | --
> | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | | > | > |
> | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update,
> here's
> | | > | > excerpts
> | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note
> the
> | | > date}:
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
> Express
> | 6
> | | > | > Service
> | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service
> Pack
> 1
> | | > | > | > (KB823353)
> | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
> Microsoft
> | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
> | updates
> | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this
> page.
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Quick Info
> | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
> | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
> | | > | > | > Version:OE6
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | | > | > | > English
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > System Requirements
> | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
> | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
> | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
> | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
> (SP1)
> | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
> | | > | > | > Windows XP
> | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
> | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
> | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
> | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
> | | > | > | > ------
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also saved
> | with
> | | > the
> | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
> information.:
> | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the < have
> been
> | | > | > removed}:
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
> | | > | > | > identity
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | >
> | | >
> |
> itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
> | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
> | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
> | | > | > | > language>en</language>
> | | > | > | > /identity>
> | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
> | | > | > | > descriptionText>
> | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
> | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
> | | > | > | > eula href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
> | | > | > | > details
> href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
> | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
> | | > | > | > /description>
> | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
> | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
> | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
> | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
> | | > | > | > /platform>
> | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
> | | > | > | >
> | | > <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
> | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
> | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
> | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update debacle.}
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | > --
> | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | > | > | > --
> | | > | > | > _________
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > | >
> | | > | > |
> | | > | >
> | | > | >
> | | > |
> | | >
> | | >
> | |
> |
> |
>
>
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Nope. The vulnerabilities aren't Critical -- just total D.O.S. to OE 6.0.
Other than that, the only thing it addresses is that ~tilde~ file that
started bugging so many people after 837009. And it fixes something someone
forgot to do in a previous patch -- set OE 5.5 to read HTML messages in the
Restricted Zone (the other versions had already been so updated, IIRC.)

But it DOES entirely replace the affected files, so it of course includes
all previous updates. Cumulative, IOW.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23cirpjewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Also the FAQ shows this:
>
> Are Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, or Windows Millennium Edition
> critically affected by any of the vulnerabilities that are addressed in
> this
> security bulletin?
> No. None of these vulnerabilities are critical in severity on Windows 98,
> on
> Windows 98 Second Edition, or on Windows Millennium Edition.
>
>
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its still
> | showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates 9X?
> |
> | --
> | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | --
> | _________
> |
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
> | |
> | | --
> | | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | --
> | | _________
> | |
> | | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if
> you're
> | | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
> stashed
> | | away
> | | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
> | machines
> | | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus
> the
> | | ones
> | | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
> | | |
> | | | --
> | | | Gary S. Terhune
> | | | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | | www.grystmill.com
> | | |
> | | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
> pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
> | | | >
> | | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
> | | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
> | | removed..
> | | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
> | | | > available
> | | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
> | outdated/superceded.
> | | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do
> this
> | | as
> | | | > well..
> | | | >
> | | | > --
> | | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | | > --
> | | | > _________
> | | | >
> | | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it
> | was.
> | | | > |
> | | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
> | | installed
> | | | > on
> | | | > a
> | | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a
> link
> | | | > that
> | | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes
> me
> | | want
> | | | > to
> | | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
> actually
> | do
> | | | > it,
> | | | > | but just a little.
> | | | > |
> | | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
> | | | > |
> | | | > | --
> | | | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | | > | www.grystmill.com
> | | | > |
> | | | > |
> | | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
> | 02-09-06
> | | | > four
> | | | > | > months prior to end.
> | | | > | >
> | | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several
> other
> | | | > updates
> | | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
> | | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
> | | | > superceded
> | | | > | > or
> | | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
> | | | > | >
> | | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | | | > offering,
> | | | > | > it
> | | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
> included.
> | | The
> | | | > | > INFs
> | | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was
> what
> I
> | | got
> | | | > | > when
> | | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future
> | use.
> | | Be
> | | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering.
> Or
> | | was
> | | | > that
> | | | > | > what you used?
> | | | > | >
> | | | > | > --
> | | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | | > | > --
> | | | > | > _________
> | | | > | >
> | | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
> | | | > | > |
> | | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
> | particular
> | | | > | > write-up
> | | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
> | | | > | > |
> | | | > | > | --
> | | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | | | > | > |
> | | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update,
> | here's
> | | | > | > excerpts
> | | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note
> the
> | | | > date}:
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
> | Express
> | | 6
> | | | > | > Service
> | | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service
> Pack
> | 1
> | | | > | > | > (KB823353)
> | | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
> Microsoft
> | | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
> | | updates
> | | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this
> page.
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Quick Info
> | | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
> | | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
> | | | > | > | > Version:OE6
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> | | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | | | > | > | > English
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > System Requirements
> | | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
> | | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
> | | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
> | | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
> (SP1)
> | | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
> | | | > | > | > Windows XP
> | | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
> | | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
> | | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
> | | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
> | | | > | > | > ------
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also
> saved
> | | with
> | | | > the
> | | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
> | information.:
> | | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the <
> have
> | been
> | | | > | > removed}:
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
> | | | > | > | > identity
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | >
> | | | >
> | |
> |
> itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
> | | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
> | | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
> | | | > | > | > language>en</language>
> | | | > | > | > /identity>
> | | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
> | | | > | > | > descriptionText>
> | | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
> | | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
> | | | > | > | > eula
> href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
> | | | > | > | > details
> href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
> | | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
> | | | > | > | > /description>
> | | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
> | | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
> | | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
> | | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
> | | | > | > | > /platform>
> | | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | >
> <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
> | | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
> | | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
> | | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update
> debacle.}
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | > --
> | | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | | | > | > | > --
> | | | > | > | > _________
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > | >
> | | | > | > |
> | | | > | >
> | | | > | >
> | | | > |
> | | | >
> | | | >
> | | |
> | |
> | |
> |
> |
>
>
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

I'm impressed!! Thank you for doing all that. Ginny
"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23bI12MdwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.
>
> Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or even
> VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't and is
> concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
> uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow its
> designs, and force the use of its OSs.
>
> XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.
> Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
> waiting a month or never, to have something fixed. Wouldn't you rather have
> manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft. Wouldn't you
> rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect you
> [with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the comparison
> is negated].
> Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding, yet just
> about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you support
> a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their own?
>
> Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
> desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports to
> be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...
>
> Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster called
> Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the error
> reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost the
> files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the parties who
> brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for doing so,
> did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am I, ah
> yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which I PAY
> to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret.... no
> matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
> environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world needed [it
> was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
> environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has, per my
> own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers. That
> it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is something I
> can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this group, I
> will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
> completely do.
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:uLSizKVwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:O7NB9RUwIHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > Let's just end this with a fact:
> | >
> | > Microsoft is attempting to foster open source for its proposed newer
> | > operating systems... think you can guess WHY... and that pretty much
> ends
> | > any debate about just how good XP and Vista are....
> |
> | Don't be obtuse. That's about as ridiculous a piece of logic as you've
> | launched all day. IF MS is trying to coopt the open source community
> (which
> | is what you claim amounts to), it's because they can't come up with what
> | they WANTED Vista to be, a whole new OS with a whole new file system and
> | everything else that everyone, including me, knows are weak points in
> 2K/XP.
> |
> | Whereas the "debate" we *were* having, until you changed it again, was one
> | of comparative OSes that NOW EXIST. I never claimed that XP was the cat's
> | meow, that it doesn't need replacing, and teh sooner the better. It's just
> a
> | LOT better than Windows 9x in almost all respects, and, for the mass
> | consumer, the only reasonable choice available. (Careful, well-off persons
> | might choose Mac, instead, especially since they made it run Windows
> | decently, but only geeks run Linux distros.)
> |
> | Doesn't mean I think XP is bad, either. I've been using XP since before
> RTM
> | and for a lot of various types of real work, using lots of major apps and
> | minor apps, updating, etc., etc. There have been some stumbles, but
> nothing
> | so catastrophic as I'd regularly run into using Win9x, nor as frequent,
> etc.
> | I have an abiding appreciation for XP's robustness and breadth of possible
> | functionality compared to 9x, based upon real use. Lastly, like I said, I
> | used them both for real work, and didn't have time to figure out anything
> of
> | the Linux flavor.
> |
> | I learned 98 when I was disabled and living in a tiny travel trailer. Once
> I
> | found them in the beginning of '99, I had time to participate in the
> groups,
> | tear 98 apart, try all kinds of apps, all kinds of cinfigurations, some
> | hardware changes, even ran a virus just to see what it did, to report to
> | this group. I used my 98 Upgrade CD, purchased the day it came out, to
> | reinstall my P200 system many hundreds of times in just a few short
> months.
> | Etc., etc. But then I had to go back to work, and didn't have time for
> much
> | of that (relatively). And now my brain doesn't work well enough to learn.
> No
> | retention. Which is why I haven't even moved to supporting XP. Not
> qualified
> | and not up to becoming so.
> |
> | Once I get a bit more on my feet (maybe next winter), I'll see how Linux
> has
> | matured. Last time I tried it (before XP came out) every distro I tried
> was
> | a misrerable failure. I don't want to HAVE to build the entire OS from
> | scratch, practically, just to get my machine running. Didn't even get to
> | find out if I could get real work done on them. (I was in the publishing
> | business. Lots of graphics work. I also made money building Access apps
> and
> | other odd but very demanding projects.) So, you think any of the distros
> are
> | going to make me happy? Will any of them run Photoshop? (No, there is NO
> | replacement for Photoshop!)
> |
> | > Sorry not really in this type of debating mood at the moment, still
> stuck
> | > in Legal mode [local and distant]...
> |
> | Sorry, you started it. You want it finished, just stop replying. As for
> the
> | legal blah blah, best wishes.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > news:uHaakITwIHA.3968@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > |
> | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | news:e39giUSwIHA.3484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | >
> | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | > news:O6TJ5MPwIHA.4564@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | > | news:OWeKt3OwIHA.516@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | > | > news:%23k1oCnOwIHA.516@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | > | Windows XP is no more a POS than 98. I don't use Vista so I
> | > can't
> | > | > | > comment,
> | > | > | > | but I imagine it's the same thing, though I tend to think of
> | > Vista
> | > | > as
> | > | > | > XP's
> | > | > | > | ME. As for your hardware argument, that's total BS. Windows 98
> | > lost
> | > | > it's
> | > | > | > | market share (dropped into the low single-digits) long before
> | > new
> | > | > | > hardware
> | > | > | > | stopped supporting it.
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | People LIKE operating systems that just work. Windows XP is
> and
> | > | > always
> | > | > | > has
> | > | > | > | been more robust than 98. That's why IT people like it (go
> | > ahead,
> | > | > show
> | > | > | > me
> | > | > | > a
> | > | > | > | survey of IT's where 98 is compared favorably with other
> | > systems.)
> | > | > | > That's
> | > | > | > | why home users and SOHO users and everyone else like XP. As
> for
> | > | > | > security,
> | > | > | > | the only difference between now on XP and then on 98 is in the
> | > | > details.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > IT goes for what's EASY to use, what seems to be hot, and are
> just
> | > as
> | > | > | > easily mislead as any other party.
> | > | > | > Just as the home user THOUGHT they were getting a much more
> secure
> | > | > system,
> | > | > | > so did IT. Just as the home user doesn't want to spend much time
> | > | > learning
> | > | > | > how to use a computer, so does IT.
> | > | > | > The relational charcturistics between home and IT or other
> | > | > professionals
> | > | > | > runs parallel. Look on the one hand at IT trying to secure their
> | > | > systems,
> | > | > | > and the other; the web development department attempting to
> create
> | > new
> | > | > | > ways
> | > | > | > to garner more information via script and other... how smart is
> | > this.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | And your point is? What you describe is how it's always been, and
> in
> | > | > fact
> | > | > I
> | > | > | DO say that XP makes ALL of those tasks easier. And what makes you
> | > think
> | > | > | that IT or home users consider Security the main consideration
> when
> | > | > | purchasing a new system? If they know anything, they know it's a
> | > | > constant
> | > | > | battle no matter what system you're using, particularly if it's
> the
> | > OS
> | > | > that
> | > | > | has 80% of the market and makes such a nice big target. They rely
> | > upon
> | > | > MS
> | > | > | and third parties to protect their systems. If they are just as
> | > savvy
> | > in
> | > | > | other things, they'll never have to deal with malware. I certainly
> | > | > don't,
> | > | > | and only one or two recalcitrants amongst my clientelle have any
> | > serious
> | > | > | problems with their XP systems once I give them "the talk". On the
> | > other
> | > | > | hand, I have a few 9x clients left, and they are STILL calling me
> | > every
> | > | > few
> | > | > | months, asking if I can come and clean up some mess.
> | > | >
> | > | > Due to>>>> their improper use, same for XP. Because they can't take
> | > the
> | > | > time to learn what they are doing..
> | > | > I referenced what was occurring years ago {1992} its called
> | > Stupification
> | > | > [yeah that's mis-spelled.
> | > |
> | > | Why should every car driver be a mechanic (I shudder to think...)
> Should
> | > | every eater also be a full time farmer? What chaos! Computers are
> | > | appliances, nothing more. They feed the needs of society, not the
> | > reverse.
> | > | They just need to work in the real world, and only the *heavily*
> | > restricted
> | > | Apple offerings do that better than Windows PCs.
> | > |
> | > | > |
> | > | > | > The market you reference, showing usage reflects only that
> people
> | > CAN
> | > | > be
> | > | > | > convinced to use products which they actually know nothing
> about,
> | > just
> | > | > | > because its easier to use and happens to be widely accepted, and
> | > | > hardware
> | > | > | > support has NOT been provided in the previous OS, though much of
> | > it
> | > | > could
> | > | > | > have been by simple updates.... so it isn't necessarily a
> | > | > | > better/easier/just
> | > | > | > works OS, its a forced upgrade to get what you want or think you
> | > need,
> | > | > or
> | > | > | > does some more setup FOR YOU.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Blah, blah. The consumer market tends to buy what's new when they
> | > look
> | > | > for
> | > | > | replacements after a few years of using the old one. That's
> | > capitalism
> | > | > for
> | > | > | you, not a reasonable comparison of OSes. Again, that's the way
> it's
> | > | > always
> | > | > | been, and Luddite is the term for people who refuse to
> participate.
> | > | > Wanna
> | > | > be
> | > | > | a Luddite, OK, but the above is a false argument if you're
> comparing
> | > the
> | > | > | OSes on their own merits. When it comes to a decision between XP
> and
> | > 98
> | > | > (and
> | > | > | I'm talking about when XP first came out): Hardware support and
> | > | > installation
> | > | > | is a snap. BSODs are rare, (yes, even in those early days.) After
> | > the
> | > | > | nightmares in Win9x and NT4 (even Win2K) up to that point in time,
> | > just
> | > | > | those two items probably sold half the units. The whole point is
> | > that
> | > | > for
> | > | > | most people, they can run Windows without any major problems, with
> | > about
> | > | > as
> | > | > | much learning involved as most people can stand, and the support
> is
> | > | > second
> | > | > | only to Apple. People who don't trust Windows use Apple, which has
> | > its
> | > | > own
> | > | > | multitude of drawbacks. Just who is going to support your Linux
> | > distros.
> | > | >
> | > | > DUUUUUUUHHHHH, the people who work with it, write the drivers,
> produce
> | > the
> | > | > applications,, THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD... seems that's like in here
> | > and
> | > on
> | > | > the XP and VISTA suport forums, only in those Linux groups you're
> | > likely
> | > | > discussing the issues with the actual programmer [error, okay wait
> | > minute
> | > | > I
> | > | > think I know what needs changed,,, okay try this and see if that
> | > corrects
> | > | > the issue *or* that particular chip has a bug in it, I can't fix it
> | > | > without
> | > | > breaking others, but here's a work around Bob worked out which
> | > addresses
> | > | > it].......
> | > |
> | > | Have you ever learned the concept of scale? What happens when your
> | > distro
> | > | writer gets sick, or just sick of people, or even dead? I know, you'll
> | > say
> | > | that if the distro has "legs" it will develop a decent cadre of people
> | > | willing to help with it, but will there also be an ever widening
> circle
> | > of
> | > | happy *programmers* ready to do the same? Or will we pay them via
> | > PayPal?
> | > |
> | > | The Linux concept may some day mature (though I personally think it
> has
> | > some
> | > | fatal flaws), but that day is still far off. Until then, Windows is
> it.
> | > |
> | > | > SO where's your ludite comparison now... in the toilet... being one
> of
> | > the
> | > | > cattle has never been my strong suit.
> | > |
> | > | Luddite is the perfect word. Your entire spiel brings to mind
> | > clippety-clop
> | > | music and horse & carriage, though nicely pastoral, scenes (I'm an
> | > American,
> | > | after all). Whether you "moo" or not is up to you.
> | > |
> | > | > And YEEEEAAAAHHHHHH, they can *barely* run Windows, until they mess
> | > | > something up, or Microsoft breaks something in one of is updates [as
> | > | > usual]///// and then we try to help, like we like to do.
> | > |
> | > | If you lived in the real world, you'd know that you just reaffirmed my
>
> | > | entire thesis. IME, once they learn the basics, MOST people don't need
> | > much
> | > | programming/hardware help with their Windows XP systems. Not from
> other
> | > | people. Certainly not as much as they need(ed) with Win9x, by orders
> of
> | > | magnitude. And, again by orders of magnitude, not nearly as much as
> any
> | > | other OS -- except Mac, because you pay through the nose for
> stability.
> | > |
> | > | > | > If they actually knew much or had an actual desire to learn,
> | > they'd
> | > be
> | > | > | > using one of the Linux clones or other OS. Were it not for the
> | > DEEP
> | > | > | > relationship with manufacturers that Microsoft now has, Windows
> | > | > wouldn't
> | > | > | > be
> | > | > | > anywhere near the usage level that it is; between the two
> FORCING
> | > | > Windows
> | > | > | > usage
> | > | > |
> | > | > | Hey, you seem to know a lot. Why are you using Windows? You've got
> | > so
> | > | > many
> | > | > | other choices and you already KNOW that all versions of Windows
> are
> | > POS.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | --
> | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | >
> | > | > Right, the usual "well you're running Windows" so STF, but I also
> ran
> | > | > Linux, Xenix, and several other OSs... but I suppose I'm supposed to
> | > be
> | > a
> | > | > mindless Windows junky, blindly following the masses, lauding the
> | > VIRTUES
> | > | > of
> | > | > the newest release or whatever is the supposed best version. Don't
> you
> | > see
> | > | > the comparison to what's occurring now,,, the resistence to move to
> | > VISTA,
> | > | > the spouting of the VALUE of XP as it draws near to support end, its
> | > | > already
> | > | > marked for death,,, how can you FAIL to see the comparison to 98 and
> | > what
> | > | > occurred... what then, spouting how VISTA is now the OS of
> choice,the
> | > | > super
> | > | > sophisicated, unfailingly superior,, or maybe the new Version 7,,
> | > yep...
> | > | > ride that train, or stand back and look at what is occurring
> | > |
> | > | Hey, I just figured you'd have much better places to be. Where you
> could
> | > | help other users with your *preferred* OS/distro. Sheesh! My question
> | > was
> | > | serious: If Windows is such a POS in general, why do you devote so
> much
> | > time
> | > | to it? Now that I think about it, and from what you've said, I can't
> | > believe
> | > | you actually run it. You wouldn't be that, er, imprudent. But...
> | > then....
> | > |
> | > | Vista will be passed over much like ME, and for much the same reasons,
> | > | though perhaps with a better numbers showing than ME, even in relative
> | > | terms. It's a mongrel. Can't really DO anything that XP can't, and
> what
> | > they
> | > | DID add that isn't just eye-candy, what they actually did at the
> system
> | > | level, they did very poorly, and I'm not talking about the kinds of
> | > things
> | > | you fix with a patch or even an SP. XP Professional can certainly
> handle
> | > | basic hardware developments for some time to come.
> | > |
> | > | The next Windows system will, as I said, have to be an entirely new
> | > | paradigm. If it can't be that, we may as well stay with WinXP or
> switch
> | > | provider altogether. But any replacement for Microsoft will have to
> deal
> | > | with scale and capitalism* as well as Microsoft. Got any candidates?
> | > |
> | > | (*Mass capitalism, where "easy" and "convenient" are the ruling
> | > paradigms,
> | > | not "cheap" and certainly not "quality". In fact, now that I think
> about
> | > it,
> | > | your notions are more than a little communistic, and while I won't
> | > debate
> | > | you capitalism vs. communism (we'd probably agree too much to make the
> | > | conversation worth it), we live in a raw, capitalistic world.)
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | > | > | As for security, the main issues involve IE and OE and if
> Win9x
> | > was
> | > | > | > | supported, they'd be getting just as many patches. As for
> other
> | > | > things
> | > | > | > that
> | > | > | > | needed fixing, 9x had just as many in relative terms.
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | Look, ANY argument that compares OS security and DOESN'T take
> | > into
> | > | > | > account
> | > | > | > | market share, the "biggest bang for the buck" operational
> theory
> | > of
> | > | > | > malware
> | > | > | > | writers, etc., is pure sophistry.
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | And you didn't deny my original premise, did you?
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > It wouldn't do any good, but I can see you would be willing to
> | > defend
> | > | > your
> | > | > | > position, I knew you would ;-]..
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | --
> | > | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | > | > | news:%23l7eJaOwIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | > | > QT can be used locally, or one can find codex to handle that
> | > | > format
> | > | > in
> | > | > | > | > some
> | > | > | > | > other player which IS being supported.
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > Right, you DO say that constantly, and you also attempt to
> | > foster
> | > | > the
> | > | > | > | > notion that XP has become the world's favorite because its
> | > just
> | > so
> | > | > | > good
> | > | > | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > secure, BS, the reason for increased usage is that it is
> | > difficult
> | > | > to
> | > | > | > find
> | > | > | > | > computer's to support 9X, leaving the only viable Windows
> | > choice
> | > | > as
> | > | > | > XP,
> | > | > | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > VISTA is still such a PITA. Try not to buy into the garbage
> | > spewed
> | > | > by
> | > | > | > | > media
> | > | > | > | > and others... OR if you wish, we CAN discuss the POS XP
> which
> | > I
> | > | > DID
> | > | > | > spend
> | > | > | > | > considerable time testing and monitoring... how good its,,,
> | > look
> | > | > HERE:
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946480/en-us
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > Think everything is fixed,,, guess again...
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > _________
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > _________
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | > | > | > news:uKoNOPOwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | > | > | I already told you, that machine has had EVERYTHING
> | > installed
> | > on
> | > | > it
> | > | > | > at
> | > | > | > | > one
> | > | > | > | > | time or another, and been through several ISPs and their
> | > | > | > | > branding/helpful
> | > | > | > | > | software, etc.
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | But what should she do if she needs QT to play something?
> | > After
> | > | > all,
> | > | > | > | > what
> | > | > | > | > | you say about QT on Windows 98 could be said about Win98
> | > itself.
> | > | > In
> | > | > | > | > fact,
> | > | > | > | > I
> | > | > | > | > | say it fairly regularly in places where people might
> | > actually
> | > | > | > listen.
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | --
> | > | > | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | > | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | > | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | > | > | > | news:uzyZhGOwIHA.1504@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > | > | > | > | > Apple's QuickTime for 98 has not been supported for some
> | > time.
> | > | > It
> | > | > | > is
> | > | > | > a
> | > | > | > | > | > security risk, and is severely outdated.
> | > | > | > | > | > Unless you have some special need to use it online, do
> not
> | > | > allow
> | > | > | > it
> | > | > | > | > access
> | > | > | > | > | > to the Internet.
> | > | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > | > Are you using AOL or some other ISP which installed this
> | > for
> | > | > you?
> | > | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > | > _________
> | > | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > | > "Tim Slattery" <Slattery_T@bls.gov> wrote in message
> | > | > | > | > | > news:fa1r3490ic78jqm9d8p4mkkvf84r0rcg82@4ax.com...
> | > | > | > | > | > | "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote:
> | > | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | > | >Could someone please tell me what Quick Time is?
> Sygate
> | > | > says
> | > | > it
> | > | > | > was
> | > | > | > | > | > critical that I
> | > | > | > | > | > | >had approved a whole bunch of new dlls for Quick
> Time,
> | > and
> | > | > I
> | > | > | > don't
> | > | > | > | > even
> | > | > | > | > | > remember what
> | > | > | > | > | > | >it is. Ginny
> | > | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | > | QuickTime is Apple's video player. It plays *.mov and
> | > *.mp4
> | > | > | > files,
> | > | > | > | > | > | which Windows Media Player will not. Installing it
> will
> | > also
> | > | > get
> | > | > | > you
> | > | > | > | > | > | endless nags from Apple to upgrade it and iTunes
> | > (whether
> | > | > you
> | > | > | > have
> | > | > | > | > | > | iTunes or not).
> | > | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | > | --
> | > | > | > | > | > | Tim Slattery
> | > | > | > | > | > | MS MVP(Shell/User)
> | > | > | > | > | > | Slattery_T@bls.gov
> | > | > | > | > | > | http://members.cox.net/slatteryt
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | > --
> | > | > _________
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Well that may be, I'm still trying to figure it out,,, not even the file, as
previously mentioned, has the usual inclusions, yet WAS once installed by WU
as a critical update in 98SE.

More of Microsoft's unusual behavior, maybe it was off its meds when it was
pushing installation before.. who knows, if it works I guess do it..

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:%23UWSxxewIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| Did I say it says anywhere that Win9x is "supported"? If I did, I was
| mistaking it with another quite similar download yesterday, one of the
MSXML
| patches (thought it turns out the second one of those didn't install on
9x.)
|
| All I know is that it works, so I gotta figure it's called censorship of
the
| literature.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its still
| > showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates 9X?
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
| > |
| > | --
| > | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | --
| > | _________
| > |
| > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if
you're
| > | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
| > stashed
| > | away
| > | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
| > machines
| > | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus
the
| > | ones
| > | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
| > | |
| > | | --
| > | | Gary S. Terhune
| > | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | | www.grystmill.com
| > | |
| > | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
| > pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
| > | | >
| > | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those old
| > | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
| > | removed..
| > | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if still
| > | | > available
| > | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
| > outdated/superceded.
| > | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could do
| > this
| > | as
| > | | > well..
| > | | >
| > | | > --
| > | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | | > --
| > | | > _________
| > | | >
| > | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever it
| > was.
| > | | > |
| > | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
| > | installed
| > | | > on
| > | | > a
| > | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to a
| > link
| > | | > that
| > | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked. Makes
| > me
| > | want
| > | | > to
| > | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
| > actually
| > do
| > | | > it,
| > | | > | but just a little.
| > | | > |
| > | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
| > | | > |
| > | | > | --
| > | | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | | > |
| > | | > |
| > | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
| > 02-09-06
| > | | > four
| > | | > | > months prior to end.
| > | | > | >
| > | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several
| > other
| > | | > updates
| > | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
| > | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't completely
| > | | > superceded
| > | | > | > or
| > | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
| > | | > | >
| > | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04 IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > | | > offering,
| > | | > | > it
| > | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
| > included.
| > | The
| > | | > | > INFs
| > | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was
what
| > I
| > | got
| > | | > | > when
| > | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for future
| > use.
| > | Be
| > | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original offering.
| > Or
| > | was
| > | | > that
| > | | > | > what you used?
| > | | > | >
| > | | > | > --
| > | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | | > | > --
| > | | > | > _________
| > | | > | >
| > | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| > | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
| > | | > | > |
| > | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
| > particular
| > | | > | > write-up
| > | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
| > | | > | > |
| > | | > | > | --
| > | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | | > | > |
| > | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be interested.
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the update,
| > here's
| > | | > | > excerpts
| > | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006 {note
| > the
| > | | > date}:
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
| > Express
| > | 6
| > | | > | > Service
| > | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service
| > Pack
| > 1
| > | | > | > | > (KB823353)
| > | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
| > Microsoft
| > | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other security
| > | updates
| > | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this
| > page.
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Quick Info
| > | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
| > | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
| > | | > | > | > Version:OE6
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| > | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | | > | > | > English
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > System Requirements
| > | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack 2,
| > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack 4,
| > | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
| > | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
| > (SP1)
| > | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
| > | | > | > | > Windows XP
| > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
| > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
| > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
| > | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
| > | | > | > | > ------
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also
saved
| > | with
| > | | > the
| > | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
| > information.:
| > | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the <
have
| > been
| > | | > | > removed}:
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
| > | | > | > | > identity
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | >
| > | | >
| > |
| >
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
| > | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
| > | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
| > | | > | > | > language>en</language>
| > | | > | > | > /identity>
| > | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
| > | | > | > | > descriptionText>
| > | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 SP1
| > | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
| > | | > | > | > eula
href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
| > | | > | > | > details
| > href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
| > | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
| > | | > | > | > /description>
| > | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
| > | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
| > | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build="" servicePackMajor=""
| > | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
| > | | > | > | > /platform>
| > | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | >
<downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
| > | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
| > | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
| > | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update
debacle.}
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | > --
| > | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | | > | > | > --
| > | | > | > | > _________
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > | >
| > | | > | > |
| > | | > | >
| > | | > | >
| > | | > |
| > | | >
| > | | >
| > | |
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

That was harsh, and so I should add... Yes, 98 was great. But you know as
well as I do that it had fatal flaws. It *had* to be replaced. Then we got
what we got from MS, which I recognize as an attempt to create a master OS
that would run in all kinds of "interwoven" devices. Nobody else has come
close to stepping up to the plate, yet. Numbers don't lie, Linux distros are
flat, and it's not like they aren't being marketed. Then there's the most
recent thing to decently boost Mac sales. The ability to run Windows XP
decently using a VM!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:%23dJr$aewIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23bI12MdwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.

>
> Hey, I'm just looking at the numbers.
>
>> Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or even
>> VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't and
>> is
>> concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
>> uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow its
>> designs, and force the use of its OSs.

>
> Again, the story is in the numbers -- FACTS. And again, capitalism is a
> FACT. The vast uninformed society is a FACT. Apple's upper-level quality
> (and price) are FACTS. Microsoft's predatory practices are FACTS. I don't
> dispute that "the world is moving", but it's moving at a snail's pace
> toward something nobody can yet foresee.
>
>> XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.

>
> Means a heck of a lot to me and everyone who uses it!
>
>> Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
>> waiting a month or never, to have something fixed.

>
> No. I would not want my machine used as a test box every day.
>
>>Wouldn't you rather have
>> manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft.

>
> Work with users in what way? I'd rather the hardware and the OS code got
> along, thank you, and I don't think it should be the OS getting changed
> every day in order to keep up with every whim of every hardware developer
> out there, much less the hardware manufacturers' "users". Again, you are
> describing chaos.
>
>>Wouldn't you
>> rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect you
>> [with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the
>> comparison
>> is negated].

>
> Where do you get these "thousands of code-knowledgeable people"? And how
> am I supposed to choose who to listen to? No, now that I think abou tit,
> the LAST thing I want is a bunch of "code-knowledgeable people" helping
> me. I want other USERS helping me. I want the code people to busy
> themselves keeping the code in good order and I want them to ALL BE ON THE
> SAME TEAM!
>
>> Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding, yet
>> just
>> about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you
>> support
>> a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their own?

>
> No, I never wondered that. I knew the answer without having to actually
> ask the question. It's akin to a law of nature. But you imply that the
> other OSes are hack proof, or inherently less insecure, that they are
> without faults in logic, without vulnerabilities just as nasty as the ones
> you bemoan in WIndows, and that's a crock.
>
> And you still don't get it -- I have no big attachment to XP other than
> it's what gets the job done for me and none of the others could come
> close. My only other observation is that XP/Vista appear to be maintaining
> their share, or losing it at a snails pace at worst, and that this is due
> to basic capitalism. Microsoft, or anyone who seeks to replace them, need
> a brand new bag altogether, but I prefer the current state of affairs to
> the chaos you describe.
>
>> Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
>> desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports to
>> be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...

>
> How is it that you keep seeing me as "fighting" for XP/Vista/whatever? I
> have no dog in this fight. I just want the winner when the dust settles.
> For the last several years, that's been Windows XP and now this mongrel
> Vista.
>
>> Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster called
>> Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the error
>> reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost the
>> files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the parties
>> who
>> brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for doing
>> so,
>> did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am I, ah
>> yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which I
>> PAY
>> to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret.... no
>> matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
>> environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world needed
>> [it
>> was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
>> environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has, per
>> my
>> own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers.
>> That
>> it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is
>> something I
>> can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this group, I
>> will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
>> completely do.

>
> As PA Bear implied, you tend toward the Quixotic. I don't care about your
> theories and academic opinions, your howling in the night. Your worldview
> is at odds with reality.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
>
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Just tested a fresh setup of SE with ALL options chosen, installed IE6SP1,
went to WU and fully updated (except for the big optionals, WMP, DX, etc.)
and then checked for any further updates. It's not mentioned. Then I
installed it manually with no problems and proper results. I'm adding it to
my distro.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OWvbUWfwIHA.3516@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Well that may be, I'm still trying to figure it out,,, not even the file,
> as
> previously mentioned, has the usual inclusions, yet WAS once installed by
> WU
> as a critical update in 98SE.
>
> More of Microsoft's unusual behavior, maybe it was off its meds when it
> was
> pushing installation before.. who knows, if it works I guess do it..
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:%23UWSxxewIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | Did I say it says anywhere that Win9x is "supported"? If I did, I was
> | mistaking it with another quite similar download yesterday, one of the
> MSXML
> | patches (thought it turns out the second one of those didn't install on
> 9x.)
> |
> | All I know is that it works, so I gotta figure it's called censorship of
> the
> | literature.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its
> still
> | > showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates
> 9X?
> | >
> | > --
> | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > --
> | > _________
> | >
> | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
> | > |
> | > | --
> | > | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | --
> | > | _________
> | > |
> | > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | > | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if
> you're
> | > | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
> | > stashed
> | > | away
> | > | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of 98
> | > machines
> | > | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them. Plus
> the
> | > | ones
> | > | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
> | > | |
> | > | | --
> | > | | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | | www.grystmill.com
> | > | |
> | > | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
> | > pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
> | > | | >
> | > | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those
> old
> | > | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what was
> | > | removed..
> | > | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if
> still
> | > | | > available
> | > | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
> | > outdated/superceded.
> | > | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could
> do
> | > this
> | > | as
> | > | | > well..
> | > | | >
> | > | | > --
> | > | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | | > --
> | > | | > _________
> | > | | >
> | > | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | > | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before, whenever
> it
> | > was.
> | > | | > |
> | > | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had been
> | > | installed
> | > | | > on
> | > | | > a
> | > | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led to
> a
> | > link
> | > | | > that
> | > | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked.
> Makes
> | > me
> | > | want
> | > | | > to
> | > | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
> | > actually
> | > do
> | > | | > it,
> | > | | > | but just a little.
> | > | | > |
> | > | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
> | > | | > |
> | > | | > | --
> | > | | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | | > |
> | > | | > |
> | > | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | > | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered, then
> | > 02-09-06
> | > | | > four
> | > | | > | > months prior to end.
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like several
> | > other
> | > | | > updates
> | > | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
> | > | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't
> completely
> | > | | > superceded
> | > | | > | > or
> | > | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04
> IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | > | | > offering,
> | > | | > | > it
> | > | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
> | > included.
> | > | The
> | > | | > | > INFs
> | > | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it was
> what
> | > I
> | > | got
> | > | | > | > when
> | > | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for
> future
> | > use.
> | > | Be
> | > | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original
> offering.
> | > Or
> | > | was
> | > | | > that
> | > | | > | > what you used?
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > | > --
> | > | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | | > | > --
> | > | | > | > _________
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | > | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | > | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
> | > | | > | > |
> | > | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
> | > particular
> | > | | > | > write-up
> | > | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
> | > | | > | > |
> | > | | > | > | --
> | > | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
> | > | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
> | > | | > | > |
> | > | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | > | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be
> interested.
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the
> update,
> | > here's
> | > | | > | > excerpts
> | > | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006
> {note
> | > the
> | > | | > date}:
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for Outlook
> | > Express
> | > | 6
> | > | | > | > Service
> | > | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6 Service
> | > Pack
> | > 1
> | > | | > | > | > (KB823353)
> | > | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
> | > Microsoft
> | > | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other
> security
> | > | updates
> | > | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of this
> | > page.
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Quick Info
> | > | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
> | > | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
> | > | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
> | > | | > | > | > Version:OE6
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> | > | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
> | > | | > | > | > English
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > System Requirements
> | > | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack
> 2,
> | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack
> 4,
> | > | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
> | > | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack 1
> | > (SP1)
> | > | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
> | > | | > | > | > Windows XP
> | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
> | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
> | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
> | > | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
> | > | | > | > | > ------
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also
> saved
> | > | with
> | > | | > the
> | > | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
> | > information.:
> | > | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
>| > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the <
> have
> | > been
> | > | | > | > removed}:
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
> | > | | > | > | > identity
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | >
> | > |
> | >
> itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
> | > | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1." name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
> | > | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
> | > | | > | > | > language>en</language>
> | > | | > | > | > /identity>
> | > | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
> | > | | > | > | > descriptionText>
> | > | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
> SP1
> | > | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
> | > | | > | > | > eula
> href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
> | > | | > | > | > details
> | > href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
> | > | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
> | > | | > | > | > /description>
> | > | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
> | > | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
> | > | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build=""
> servicePackMajor=""
> | > | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
> | > | | > | > | > /platform>
> | > | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | >
> <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
> | > | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
> | > | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
> | > | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update
> debacle.}
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | > --
> | > | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> | > | | > | > | > --
> | > | | > | > | > _________
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > | >
> | > | | > | > |
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > | >
> | > | | > |
> | > | | >
> | > | | >
> | > | |
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time


Microsoft has to rely upon uniformed people to use its Os's? Let me get
this straight. You alone are so wise, and the rest of us minions are
fools, are we? What incredible arrogance. What horrific ignorance.


--
Darryl_Gittins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Darryl_Gittins's Profile: http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=50686
View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=977754

http://forums.techarena.in
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

SEE APPLE QuickTime US CERT warnings/alert I posted in this group on
04/04/2008 [see suggestion and, responses provided alternatives or
recommendations], also see older QT warnings this group and elsewhere..

REFERENCE
National Cyber Alert System
Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-094A
Apple Updates for Multiple Vulnerabilities
Original release date: April 3, 2008

SEE ALSO:
"One of the fastest growing threats - the web site you visit" - MEB
05/01/2008 - this group, ignore the more ignorant responses [consider with
the Flash vulnerabilities FINALLY addressed, though its still vulnerable].
AND:
SUN JAVA Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-066A - posted here 03-07-2008
if you intend to use SUN.
,

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:uib%23sCWwIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| Decided to run the latest installer I have to see if it tells you up front
| what version... There it was in huge letters. 6.5.1. And it was released
| prior to December '04, not '05. Another of my many brain farts today. What
| IS strange is that I have no versions prior to that in the places I'd
expect
| to find them. I'm a true packrat when it comes to that kind of stuff.
Gotta
| be earlier versions here, somewhere. Ahh, here we go. Versions 4 & 5...
All
| I'm missing is 3 and I just didn't feel like waiting for Search to
complete
| inspection of my vast ZIPped archives, my backups of backups, etc.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| news:u0r7OqVwIHA.5288@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| >I do know that QT version 5 at least works on Win98SE. I stopped
there,
| >as I started getting tired of the bloat (as is so often the case) with
the
| >newer versions.
| >
| > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| >> Leave it for now. I'll have you a full answer tomorrow if I can. What
| >> you've
| >> probably got is the same ancient, dangerous, version that MEB was
| >> complaining about. We need to find the latest version that will still
run
| >> on
| >> 9x. I'm may have it, but I'm in the middle of rebuilding my 98 box so I
| >> can't test and make sure, know how to instruct you in its installation,
| >> etc.
| >>
| >> (Actually, I coulda sworn I found v.6 on the QT site and that it works
| >> with
| >> Win98, but I guess I'll have to go through my History to find it.
| >> Assuming I
| >> don't already have it. Latest version I could find quickly was one I
| >> downloaded in late '05.)
| >>
| >> --
| >> Gary S. Terhune
| >> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >> www.grystmill.com
| >>
| >> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >> news:483e4acf$0$25060$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>> I googled one of the missing Quick Time files QT32INST.EXE downloaded
it
| >>> and ran it
| >>> and it repaired Quick Time. It even installed the QTW32DEL.EXE that
was
| >>> missing. Now
| >>> I have both of the Quick Time logos QT & QT32 in my add/remove
programs
| >>> and in
| >>> Control Panel. I don't believe the QT one works but my movies are
| >>> playing
| >>> well,
| >>> automatically with the Quick Time 32. So I am leaving it alone as I am
| >>> sure there are
| >>> shared files. Unless anyone has any ideas as to how to get rid of it
| >>> without hurting
| >>> Quick Time 32.
| >>>
| >>>
| >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>> news:uPfCyEUwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| >>>> I need YOU to be more patient. And to stop posting wherever you feel
| >>>> like
| >>>> it. I know this is a long and multi-threaded issue, but it's your
| >>>> responsibility to find the proper thread and post to respond to. If
you
| >>>> think it's missing, then at least go back to the top of this thread
| >>>> ("IE
| >>>> works so far", not "What is Quick Time") to post your "I'm lost"
post.
| >>>> While
| >>>> this was intended to be a wrap-up thread for the original issue,
you're
| >>>> now
| >>>> tacking new issues onto it, like this whole Sygate/QT thread. No need
| >>>> to
| >>>> further muck up the works by adding more to this sub-thread.
| >>>>
| >>>> So be patient, I have had to answer lots of posts today and some in
| >>>> depth,
| >>>> and I've done a lot of research on your part and on the part of
others.
| >>>> I
| >>>> also had to rebuild my 98 machine, eat, etc., etc. And because you
| >>>> posted
| >>>> these MSXML questions here instead of where they belong, *I* have to
go
| >>>> searching for wherever in this mess the posts regarding MSXML update,
| >>>> etc.,
| >>>> is located. I'll post/repost there and answer your question(s) there.
| >>>>
| >>>> --
| >>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>
| >>>>
| >>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>> news:483e2660$0$25036$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>> I need you to read my most recent postings.
| >>>>> !. I am confused about the MSXML4sp2 updated and what to delete. I
| >>>>> need
| >>>>> it
| >>>>> explained more clearly, please.
| >>>>> 2. Quick Time doesn't have an uninstaller. When I hit add/remove
| >>>>> programs
| >>>>> it
| >>>>> said it was uninstalling my Camedia (the program I attach my digital
| >>>>> camera
| >>>>> to the computer...that was o.k.
| >>>>> But, there is nothing that says uninstall quick Time, It only gives
| >>>>> the
| >>>>> option to remove extensions. (in add/remove programs) and it says
that
| >>>>> I
| >>>>> shouldn't do that.
| >>>>> In Internet Options when I click it. It tells me that I should
| >>>>> uninstall
| >>>>> and
| >>>>> install again as I am missing 2 exe files.
| >>>>> If I put the CD in the drive....will that give me an option to
| >>>>> uninstall?
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
| >>>>> From: "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
| >>>>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
| >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 11:21 PM
| >>>>> Subject: Re: IE Running well so far
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>> Then you DO have that very old version MEB was talking about. You
| >>>>>> should
| >>>>>> uninstall it, then hope your banking site doesn't require it. Might
| >>>>>> just
| >>>>>> look different but still work. (I thought I had a link to the last
| >>>>>> version
| >>>>>> that worked with Win98, but I'll have to look deeper.)
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> --
| >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>>> news:483e04fb$0$15193$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>>> Sorry, Gary I got side tracked trying to get online again. I will
| >>>>>>> uninstall that
| >>>>>>> update(4.0sdk).
| >>>>>>> The 2 Q Times are in Internet Options- Control Panel. Q time says
if
| >>>>>>> I
| >>>>>>> uninstall it I
| >>>>>>> will uninstall the program it came with. I haven't the slightest
| >>>>>>> idea
| >>>>> what
| >>>>>>> it came
| >>>>>>> with . It is not in any of my Programs under Start. Further
| >>>>>>> investigation
| >>>>>>> shows that
| >>>>>>> the version is 2.1.2.59 (Quick Time for Windows) It says it is for
| >>>>>>> Window 95 and is missing QT32INST.EXE AND QTW32EEL.EXE....which is
| >>>>>>> why
| >>>>>>> I
| >>>>>>> can't open
| >>>>>>> it. It says I should uninstall and reinstall but I don't know
what
| >>>>>>> CD
| >>>>> it
| >>>>>>> would be on
| >>>>>>> to re-install.
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> I will uninstall the 4.0sp1 now, after I make sure I can get
online.
| >>>>>>> Gin
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>>>>>> news:u44BNBOwIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>>> You still have MSXML 4.0 SP1. Here's some updates you might want
to
| >>>>>>>> consider:
| >>>>>>>> First, uninstall that Update we installed that includes the SDK.
If
| >>>>>>>> you're
| >>>>>>>> not sure which one, write down any entry that includes MSXML and
| >>>>>>>> post
| >>>>> it
| >>>>>>>> here. After uninstalling that, then get:
| >>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>> MSXML 4.0 Service Pack 2 http://tinyurl.com/59qer
| >>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>> then this patch:
| >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/y6a2sl
| >>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>>>>> news:483cf7f0$0$15192$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>>>>> All three are version 4.10.9404.0 and they were all created
| >>>>>>>>> 2/4/02.
| >>>>>>>>> msxml4.dll is 80.5 KB, msxml4r.dll is 1.17 MB, msxml4a.dll is
| >>>>>>>>> 43.5
| >>>>> KB.
| >>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>> news:483e234b$0$25024$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>> One of my posts has 'gone missing' and I'm sitting here unclear
about
| >>>>>> how
| >>>>>> to do
| >>>>> this
| >>>>>> service patch . I downloaded msxml4-KB927978-enu.exe (file version
| >>>>>> 1)....., (I
| >>>>> typed
| >>>>>> in tinyurl.com/y6a2sl and it redirected me to this MSXML 4.0
Service
| >>>>>> Pack2
| >>>>>> (Microsoft XML Core Services) - I think that is what I downloaded.
Is
| >>>>>> that the
| >>>>> first
| >>>>>> one or the second one??
| >>>>>> Also....What am I supposed to post here and uninstall from my
| >>>>>> system???
| >>>>>> I am
| >>>>>> confused. Thanks. Gin
| >>>>>>
| >>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>>>>> news:eVflMSTwIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>> Sygate uses a database that started out blank. *Everything* you do
| >>>>>>> for
| >>>>>>> a
| >>>>>>> while will be a "change" to Sygate. If it's a program you
recognize,
| >>>>>>> then,
| >>>>>>> short of doing a lot more research, you have no choice but to
trust
| >>>>>>> that
| >>>>>>> it's not a malware DLL in disguise, and approve the update to
| >>>>>>> Sygate's
| >>>>>>> database. Once you've finished training it, then when it says
| >>>>>>> "change"
| >>>>>>> it
| >>>>>>> will almost always actually mean "change". Then you are expected
to
| >>>>>>> be
| >>>>>>> able
| >>>>>>> to remember recent changes to your system and update Sygate
| >>>>>>> appropriately.
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> If it's a question you have about the program that is being cited,
| >>>>>>> like
| >>>>>>> you
| >>>>>>> did with QT, then you do as you did: ask about it, do some
research.
| >>>>>>> But try
| >>>>>>> to refrain from acting on our advice, or even stuff you read
| >>>>>>> elsewhere
| >>>>>>> using
| >>>>>>> Google, etc., too quickly, not even mine, in case there's an
| >>>>>>> important
| >>>>>>> (or
| >>>>>>> even minor) correction, contradiction or addendum to that advice
in
| >>>>>>> the
| >>>>>>> near
| >>>>>>> future.
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> In this case, besides just what QT stands for, you should have
| >>>>>>> learned
| >>>>>>> enough in this thread to ask yourself, "Just how old IS that
| >>>>>>> QuickTime
| >>>>>>> of
| >>>>>>> mine, anyway?" and "Maybe I should uninstall it and then install
the
| >>>>>>> latest
| >>>>>>> version if I find I need it later." So, in a way, Sygate is
teaching
| >>>>>>> you,
| >>>>>>> too.
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>>>>
| >>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>>>> news:483df8c8$0$25052$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>>>> I don't mind training something. I simply don;t know if it is
o.k.
| >>>>>>>> to
| >>>>>>>> allow
| >>>>>>>> every
| >>>>>>>> program to add new .dlls to my Internet Explorer and Outlook
| >>>>>>>> Express. If
| >>>>>>>> it is
| >>>>>>>> harmless, I will simply say yes. and go about my business. But it
| >>>>>>>> seems to
| >>>>>>>> me we
| >>>>>>>> spent an awful lot of time getting rid of .dlls that didn't
belong
| >>>>>>>> and
| >>>>>>>> putting in
| >>>>>>>> .dlls that had disappeared. My question was simple. Do I allow my
| >>>>>>>> Internet
| >>>>>>>> Explorer
| >>>>>>>> and Outlook Express to be changed by my programs.
| >>>>>>>> It doesn't say that Sygate is changing anything. It is Sygate
| >>>>>>>> reporting to
| >>>>>>>> me that
| >>>>>>>> these programs are changing my IE & OE. I assumed that before
| >>>>>>>> Sygate,
| >>>>>>>> my
| >>>>>>>> programs
| >>>>>>>> were doing this but I just didn't know. Am I making any sense?
| >>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>>>>>>> news:%239wnV0RwIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>>>> My guess is that the page you went to includes items that are
| >>>>>>>>> viewed
| >>>>>>>>> using a
| >>>>>>>>> QT plugin. What you describe (QT and QT32) sound like plugins
and
| >>>>>>>>> they
| >>>>>>>>> are
| >>>>>>>>> just different versions of the same thing (16-bit and 32-bit),
| >>>>>>>>> installed
| >>>>>>>>> by
| >>>>>>>>> the same installer. Where are these things listed in Internet
| >>>>>>>>> Options? On
| >>>>>>>>> what tab, under what button? (Sorry, I can't check against my
| >>>>>>>>> system
| >>>>>>>>> as I
| >>>>>>>>> am
| >>>>>>>>> in the process of rebuilding it.) Anyway, if it bugs you, just
| >>>>>>>>> uninstall
| >>>>>>>>> QT
| >>>>>>>>> in Add/Remove Programs and see what happens. You can always go
| >>>>>>>>> back
| >>>>>>>>> and
| >>>>>>>>> reinstall it if you discover you need it.
| >>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>> But your biggest problem is that you can't stand having to train
| >>>>>>>>> that
| >>>>>>>>> firewall. If you aren't willing to go through that process,
| >>>>>>>>> uninstall it
| >>>>>>>>> and
| >>>>>>>>> either use something else or nothing at all. You already have
| >>>>>>>>> pretty
| >>>>>>>>> decent
| >>>>>>>>> protection against intrusion. Believe me, that firewall isn't
| >>>>>>>>> done
| >>>>>>>>> bugging
| >>>>>>>>> you, not by a LONG shot.
| >>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>>>>>> news:483de66d$0$11610$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>>>>>> I have Quick Time and Quick Time32 in my Internet Options. I
| >>>>>>>>>> have
| >>>>>>>>>> Quick
| >>>>>>>>>> Time in
| >>>>>>>>>> Add/Remove programs. I went to Chase to transfer some money to
| >>>>>>>>>> my
| >>>>>>>>>> son
| >>>>>>>>>> and
| >>>>>>>>>> another
| >>>>>>>>>> popup occurred saying: "Quick Time has install the following
| >>>>>>>>>> (long
| >>>>>>>>>> list)
| >>>>>>>>>> of
| >>>>>>>>>> components to your system, do you want them to access the
| >>>>>>>>>> internet."
| >>>>>>>>>> Why
| >>>>>>>>>> would I want
| >>>>>>>>>> them to access the internet and change my Internet Explorer
| >>>>>>>>>> while
| >>>>>>>>>> I am
| >>>>>>>>>> trying to do
| >>>>>>>>>> banking??? When I said 'no' , I was unable to continue. I would
| >>>>>>>>>> like to
| >>>>>>>>>> uninstall
| >>>>>>>>>> both of them. (I only have uninstall for QT) and I don't know
| >>>>>>>>>> what
| >>>>>>>>>> QT32
| >>>>>>>>>> is!!! A
| >>>>>>>>>> little hint please. I am going to try again to get into my
| >>>>>>>>>> bank.
| >>>>>>>>>> Ginny
| >>>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >>>>>>>>>> news:utbNAQRwIHA.4772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>>>>>>> Don't be. It's not your fault MEB got up on the wrong side of
| >>>>>>>>>>> the
| >>>>>>>>>>> bed
| >>>>>>>>>>> this
| >>>>>>>>>>> morning and/or is otherwise distracted, or so it seems. Though
| >>>>>>>>>>> I
| >>>>>>>>>>> must
| >>>>>>>>>>> say
| >>>>>>>>>>> it's interesting to see his true colors when it comes to his
| >>>>>>>>>>> feelings
| >>>>>>>>>>> about
| >>>>>>>>>>> XP.
| >>>>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>>>> --
| >>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| >>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| >>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| >>>>>>>>>>>
| >>>>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| >>>>>>>>>>> news:483dd8cc$1$11631$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| >>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry I asked!!! Ginny
| >
| >
|
 
Re: IE Running well so far

Sounds like the plan then, I'll make that modification to the web page as
well.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:ueE$SofwIHA.5472@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| Just tested a fresh setup of SE with ALL options chosen, installed IE6SP1,
| went to WU and fully updated (except for the big optionals, WMP, DX, etc.)
| and then checked for any further updates. It's not mentioned. Then I
| installed it manually with no problems and proper results. I'm adding it
to
| my distro.
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:OWvbUWfwIHA.3516@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > Well that may be, I'm still trying to figure it out,,, not even the
file,
| > as
| > previously mentioned, has the usual inclusions, yet WAS once installed
by
| > WU
| > as a critical update in 98SE.
| >
| > More of Microsoft's unusual behavior, maybe it was off its meds when it
| > was
| > pushing installation before.. who knows, if it works I guess do it..
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:%23UWSxxewIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| > | Did I say it says anywhere that Win9x is "supported"? If I did, I was
| > | mistaking it with another quite similar download yesterday, one of the
| > MSXML
| > | patches (thought it turns out the second one of those didn't install
on
| > 9x.)
| > |
| > | All I know is that it works, so I gotta figure it's called censorship
of
| > the
| > | literature.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | news:OjabDeewIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > Ah, wait a minute, just re-checked the download for 823353 and its
| > still
| > | > showing no support, so where did you find that file which indicates
| > 9X?
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > --
| > | > _________
| > | >
| > | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:uRoXJYewIHA.4488@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | Thanks Gary, when/if I get to it I will..
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | --
| > | > | _________
| > | > |
| > | > | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | news:%23gdbWDewIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | You (or whoever you can coerce into helping you) let me know if
| > you're
| > | > | | missing any files. I'm perpetually surprised by the stuff I got
| > | > stashed
| > | > | away
| > | > | | on this machine... Of course, I do have several full copies of
98
| > | > machines
| > | > | | that I made as quick & dirty backups before I flattened them.
Plus
| > the
| > | > | ones
| > | > | | I personally collected at various times through the years...
| > | > | |
| > | > | | --
| > | > | | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | |
| > | > | | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | | news:ut5IC2cwIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | > OH NOOOO, don't assign that one to meeeee,
| > | > pleeeeeeaaaaassseee.......
| > | > | | >
| > | > | | > But you're right, I will likely need to go back through those
| > old
| > | > | | > iuhist.xml and Windows Update.log files and see exactly what
was
| > | > | removed..
| > | > | | > cross-check for present availability and where to find or if
| > still
| > | > | | > available
| > | > | | > [which many are not], and check to see if they were
| > | > outdated/superceded.
| > | > | | > Maybe,,,, have to see how things go ... of course others could
| > do
| > | > this
| > | > | as
| > | > | | > well..
| > | > | | >
| > | > | | > --
| > | > | | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | | > --
| > | > | | > _________
| > | > | | >
| > | > | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | | > news:OR8xleVwIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | > | No, we downloaded it last night or the night before,
whenever
| > it
| > | > was.
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | > | As for it's 9x compatibility, all I knew was that it had
been
| > | > | installed
| > | > | | > on
| > | > | | > a
| > | > | | > | 9x system and that the trail of KB + Security Bulletin led
to
| > a
| > | > link
| > | > | | > that
| > | > | | > | said, "For IESP1, all versions of Windows." And it worked.
| > Makes
| > | > me
| > | > | want
| > | > | | > to
| > | > | | > | check a few other supposedly non-9x Updates. Not enough to
| > | > actually
| > | > do
| > | > | | > it,
| > | > | | > | but just a little.
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | > | Actually, sounds like a job for you, <eg>.
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | > | --
| > | > | | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | | > | news:%234qcxcUwIHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | > | > 11-23-04 about two months after it was issued/offered,
then
| > | > 02-09-06
| > | > | | > four
| > | > | | > | > months prior to end.
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > | > Well, I don't know why it was removed, it isn't like
several
| > | > other
| > | > | | > updates
| > | > | | > | > that I have large amounts of error reports saved for.
| > | > | | > | > Your guess is as good as mine, it obviously wasn't
| > completely
| > | > | | > superceded
| > | > | | > | > or
| > | > | | > | > the older outdated update would have been removed as well.
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > | > However, looking IN the 11-23-04
| > IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > | > | | > offering,
| > | > | | > | > it
| > | > | | > | > has no direct indication of 9X support that was normally
| > | > included.
| > | > | The
| > | > | | > | > INFs
| > | > | | > | > are not the usual, yet, as I was doing at that time, it
was
| > what
| > | > I
| > | > | got
| > | > | | > | > when
| > | > | | > | > re-downloading whatever iuhist showed was installed for
| > future
| > | > use.
| > | > | Be
| > | > | | > | > interesting to see if anyone had the actual original
| > offering.
| > | > Or
| > | > | was
| > | > | | > that
| > | > | | > | > what you used?
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > | > --
| > | > | | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | | > | > --
| > | > | | > | > _________
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | > | | > | > news:OmMmxNUwIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | > | > | "...note the date..." Note what about the date?
| > | > | | > | > |
| > | > | | > | > | And it just goes to show you how much you can trust any
| > | > particular
| > | > | | > | > write-up
| > | > | | > | > | by MS to be complete.
| > | > | | > | > |
| > | > | | > | > | --
| > | > | | > | > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | > | | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | > | | > | > | www.grystmill.com
| > | > | | > | > |
| > | > | | > | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > | | > | > | news:O%23kHsJUwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | > | | > | > | > Just some further info for those who might be
| > interested.
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Though previous 98SE iuhist.xml-s did include the
| > update,
| > | > here's
| > | > | | > | > excerpts
| > | > | | > | > | > from the download page I have saved from 02/09/2006
| > {note
| > | > the
| > | > | | > date}:
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Download details: Cumulative Security Update for
Outlook
| > | > Express
| > | > | 6
| > | > | | > | > Service
| > | > | | > | > | > Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
Service
| > | > Pack
| > | > 1
| > | > | | > | > | > (KB823353)
| > | > | | > | > | > This update addresses the vulnerability discussed in
| > | > Microsoft
| > | > | | > | > | > Security Bulletin MS04-018. To find out if other
| > security
| > | > | updates
| > | > | | > | > | > are available for you, see the Overview section of
this
| > | > page.
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Quick Info
| > | > | | > | > | > File Name:IE6.0sp1-KB823353-x86-ENU.exe
| > | > | | > | > | > Download Size:1950 KB
| > | > | | > | > | > Date Published:7/14/2004
| > | > | | > | > | > Version:OE6
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| > | > | | > | > | > Service Pack 1 (KB823353)
| > | > | | > | > | > English
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Microsoft Security Bulletin MS04-018
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > System Requirements
| > | > | | > | > | > Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000 Service Pack
| > 2,
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 2000 Service Pack
| > 4,
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows NT, Windows XP, Windows XP Service Pack 1
| > | > | | > | > | > This update applies to Outlook Express 6 Service Pack
1
| > | > (SP1)
| > | > | | > | > | > with the following operating systems:
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows XP SP1
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows XP
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP2
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP3
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows 2000 SP4
| > | > | | > | > | > Windows NT 4.0 SP6A
| > | > | | > | > | > ------
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > The file I have saved with a date of 11/23/04 was also
| > saved
| > | > | with
| > | > | | > the
| > | > | | > | > | > download page [same date] which reflects the above
| > | > information.:
| > | > | | > | > | > Compare to the below date.
| >| > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > As example of one of the old iuhist containment {the <
| > have
| > | > been
| > | > | | > | > removed}:
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > itemStatus xmlns="" timestamp="2004-08-03T05:23:24">
| > | > | | > | > | > identity
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | >
| > | > |
| > | >
| >
itemID="ie60x.internetexplorer6x.ver_platform_win32_windows.4.10.x86.en.....
| > | > | | > | > | > .com_microsoft.q823353_oe6_sp1."
name="Q823353_OE6_SP1">
| > | > | | > | > | > publisherName>com_microsoft</publisherName>
| > | > | | > | > | > language>en</language>
| > | > | | > | > | > /identity>
| > | > | | > | > | > description hidden="0">
| > | > | | > | > | > descriptionText>
| > | > | | > | > | > title>Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express 6
| > SP1
| > | > | | > | > | > (KB823353)</title>
| > | > | | > | > | > eula
| > href="/msdownload/update/v3/static/eula/en/eula.htm"/>
| > | > | | > | > | > details
| > | > href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=19527"/>
| > | > | | > | > | > /descriptionText>
| > | > | | > | > | > /description>
| > | > | | > | > | > platform name="ver_platform_win32_windows">
| > | > | | > | > | > processorArchitecture>x86</processorArchitecture>
| > | > | | > | > | > version major="4" minor="10" build=""
| > servicePackMajor=""
| > | > | | > | > | > servicePackMinor=""/>
| > | > | | > | > | > /platform>
| > | > | | > | > | > <downloadStatus value="COMPLETE"/>
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | >
| > <downloadPath>c:\WUTemp\com_microsoft.Q823353_OE6_SP1</downloadPath>
| > | > | | > | > | > <client>IU_Site</client>
| > | > | | > | > | > <installStatus value="COMPLETE" needsReboot="0"/>
| > | > | | > | > | > </itemStatus>
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > {I was wrong it wasn't part of the December update
| > debacle.}
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | > --
| > | > | | > | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > | > | | > | > | > --
| > | > | | > | > | > _________
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > | >
| > | > | | > | > |
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > | >
| > | > | | > |
| > | > | | >
| > | > | | >
| > | > | |
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

Wrong. The free Linux versions don't read into the sales numbers as no one
knows how many are being run... Windows information web sites statistics
also are not reflective of use, nor are sites which REQUIRE Microsoft's
browsers, Linux users run these in an envelope to make it APPEAR to be the
proper browser and OS is used....

I would suggest you actually spend some time finding out about Linux
before making comments on what it can or can not do. Microsoft "borrows" a
good percentage of its ideas FROM the Linux world, and remember, the
programmers for Linux must generally first pull the chip code and write the
drivers from that information, for the most part, before they can implement
it. Moreover, as Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers now work to create
ever dumber devices [making them OS supported only] it becomes even more
difficult for the Linux community to apply and support those deliberately
DUMB devices..

Do some research... as my daughter says "Live Life Illuminated" or you can
remain in the dark, that's a personal choice you will make.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:O3zDBhfwIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| That was harsh, and so I should add... Yes, 98 was great. But you know as
| well as I do that it had fatal flaws. It *had* to be replaced. Then we got
| what we got from MS, which I recognize as an attempt to create a master OS
| that would run in all kinds of "interwoven" devices. Nobody else has come
| close to stepping up to the plate, yet. Numbers don't lie, Linux distros
are
| flat, and it's not like they aren't being marketed. Then there's the most
| recent thing to decently boost Mac sales. The ability to run Windows XP
| decently using a VM!
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| news:%23dJr$aewIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
| >
| > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:%23bI12MdwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| >> Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.
| >
| > Hey, I'm just looking at the numbers.
| >
| >> Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or even
| >> VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't
and
| >> is
| >> concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
| >> uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow its
| >> designs, and force the use of its OSs.
| >
| > Again, the story is in the numbers -- FACTS. And again, capitalism is a
| > FACT. The vast uninformed society is a FACT. Apple's upper-level quality
| > (and price) are FACTS. Microsoft's predatory practices are FACTS. I
don't
| > dispute that "the world is moving", but it's moving at a snail's pace
| > toward something nobody can yet foresee.
| >
| >> XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.
| >
| > Means a heck of a lot to me and everyone who uses it!
| >
| >> Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
| >> waiting a month or never, to have something fixed.
| >
| > No. I would not want my machine used as a test box every day.
| >
| >>Wouldn't you rather have
| >> manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft.
| >
| > Work with users in what way? I'd rather the hardware and the OS code got
| > along, thank you, and I don't think it should be the OS getting changed
| > every day in order to keep up with every whim of every hardware
developer
| > out there, much less the hardware manufacturers' "users". Again, you are
| > describing chaos.
| >
| >>Wouldn't you
| >> rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect
you
| >> [with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the
| >> comparison
| >> is negated].
| >
| > Where do you get these "thousands of code-knowledgeable people"? And how
| > am I supposed to choose who to listen to? No, now that I think abou tit,
| > the LAST thing I want is a bunch of "code-knowledgeable people" helping
| > me. I want other USERS helping me. I want the code people to busy
| > themselves keeping the code in good order and I want them to ALL BE ON
THE
| > SAME TEAM!
| >
| >> Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding, yet
| >> just
| >> about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you
| >> support
| >> a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their own?
| >
| > No, I never wondered that. I knew the answer without having to actually
| > ask the question. It's akin to a law of nature. But you imply that the
| > other OSes are hack proof, or inherently less insecure, that they are
| > without faults in logic, without vulnerabilities just as nasty as the
ones
| > you bemoan in WIndows, and that's a crock.
| >
| > And you still don't get it -- I have no big attachment to XP other than
| > it's what gets the job done for me and none of the others could come
| > close. My only other observation is that XP/Vista appear to be
maintaining
| > their share, or losing it at a snails pace at worst, and that this is
due
| > to basic capitalism. Microsoft, or anyone who seeks to replace them,
need
| > a brand new bag altogether, but I prefer the current state of affairs to
| > the chaos you describe.
| >
| >> Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
| >> desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports to
| >> be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...
| >
| > How is it that you keep seeing me as "fighting" for XP/Vista/whatever? I
| > have no dog in this fight. I just want the winner when the dust settles.
| > For the last several years, that's been Windows XP and now this mongrel
| > Vista.
| >
| >> Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster
called
| >> Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the
error
| >> reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost the
| >> files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the
parties
| >> who
| >> brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for doing
| >> so,
| >> did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am I,
ah
| >> yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which I
| >> PAY
| >> to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret.... no
| >> matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
| >> environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world needed
| >> [it
| >> was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
| >> environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has,
per
| >> my
| >> own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers.
| >> That
| >> it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is
| >> something I
| >> can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this group,
I
| >> will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
| >> completely do.
| >
| > As PA Bear implied, you tend toward the Quixotic. I don't care about
your
| > theories and academic opinions, your howling in the night. Your
worldview
| > is at odds with reality.
| >
| > --
| > Gary S. Terhune
| > MS-MVP Shell/User
| > www.grystmill.com
| >
| >
|
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

Not necessarily, you choose the path you follow. You posting or indicating
an Indian forum SHOULD know that, are you Hindu or Buddhist.... What now
that you have the call centers and off shore support, that supposedly makes
you the most knowledgeable? Check what is going on in the world, be someone
who seeks rather than follows. You have a lot to learn about the world.
You're an ancient culture and nation, but a recent entry to the computing
world.

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Darryl_Gittins" <Darryl_Gittins.3a7bjd@DoNotSpam.com> wrote in message
news:Darryl_Gittins.3a7bjd@DoNotSpam.com...
|
| Microsoft has to rely upon uniformed people to use its Os's? Let me get
| this straight. You alone are so wise, and the rest of us minions are
| fools, are we? What incredible arrogance. What horrific ignorance.
|
|
| --
| Darryl_Gittins
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Darryl_Gittins's Profile:
http://forums.techarena.in/member.php?userid=50686
| View this thread: http://forums.techarena.in/showthread.php?t=977754
|
| http://forums.techarena.in
|
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

There must be SOME kind of survey that reports decent stats on the usage,
particularly in the industrial and large commercial settings. In my case, I
freely admit that "my" public consists of home and SOHO users, and I'll bet
the web stats aren't at all far off in those categories. Certainly not by
any large order of magnitude. Besides, I don't know what you mean by
"Windows information web sites." Are you trying to say that
http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php is somehow rigged? And how many
sites REQUIRE IE such that you can't even get there to be counted using
Linux?

As I said, maybe when I get the time. But I don't see much in the way of
application support out there, much less hardware support. And you keep
ignoring my main point: All your whining about dumb devices and Microsoft's
stealing (let's not be coy, we both know they do it), and everything else is
meaningless to me. A world built upon innumerable Linux distros and millions
of independent programmers, and tons of tiny partnerships between
programmers and hardware developers... I don't want any part of it. I *want*
mass marketed and standardized products, even if they're dumb and crappy. As
does most of the world. That's where the tilting at windmills part comes in,
and I don't mean just you, I mean the whole utopian Linux crowd. They are
invaluable to society, but they will never come near ruling it except in
some self-satisfied sense of accomplishment.

Now, I grant you that Linux lends itself to specialization, which could be
wonderful in large networks in large companies, and Linux is perhaps making
inroads there. But I'm betting it's just as slow going as in the
personal/SOHO market. Then again, you say we have no stats for those.

Still, I don't see those Web stats changing very quickly, nor the pace of
that change changing very quickly. And while you might quibble with them a
bit, you can't go changing them by orders of magnitude just on a hunch or
based upon magazines, blogs, etc. The potential of Linux is and always has
been just that--potential. If you want to convince me that Linux has any
near-term chance to save the world from XP, then let's have the numbers.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O1wWd%23gwIHA.552@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Wrong. The free Linux versions don't read into the sales numbers as no one
> knows how many are being run... Windows information web sites statistics
> also are not reflective of use, nor are sites which REQUIRE Microsoft's
> browsers, Linux users run these in an envelope to make it APPEAR to be the
> proper browser and OS is used....
>
> I would suggest you actually spend some time finding out about Linux
> before making comments on what it can or can not do. Microsoft "borrows" a
> good percentage of its ideas FROM the Linux world, and remember, the
> programmers for Linux must generally first pull the chip code and write
> the
> drivers from that information, for the most part, before they can
> implement
> it. Moreover, as Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers now work to
> create
> ever dumber devices [making them OS supported only] it becomes even more
> difficult for the Linux community to apply and support those deliberately
> DUMB devices..
>
> Do some research... as my daughter says "Live Life Illuminated" or you can
> remain in the dark, that's a personal choice you will make.
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:O3zDBhfwIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | That was harsh, and so I should add... Yes, 98 was great. But you know
> as
> | well as I do that it had fatal flaws. It *had* to be replaced. Then we
> got
> | what we got from MS, which I recognize as an attempt to create a master
> OS
> | that would run in all kinds of "interwoven" devices. Nobody else has
> come
> | close to stepping up to the plate, yet. Numbers don't lie, Linux distros
> are
> | flat, and it's not like they aren't being marketed. Then there's the
> most
> | recent thing to decently boost Mac sales. The ability to run Windows XP
> | decently using a VM!
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> |
> | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | news:%23dJr$aewIHA.4492@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> | >
> | > "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> | > news:%23bI12MdwIHA.3760@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> | >> Gary, you're wrong or uninformed.
> | >
> | > Hey, I'm just looking at the numbers.
> | >
> | >> Check out the comparisons to the newest Linux clones verses XP [or
> even
> | >> VISTA]. You can't ignore where the world is moving. Microsoft doesn't
> and
> | >> is
> | >> concerned. Between Apple and these clones, Microsoft has to rely upon
> | >> uniformed people to use its OSs, and coerce manufactures to follow
> its
> | >> designs, and force the use of its OSs.
> | >
> | > Again, the story is in the numbers -- FACTS. And again, capitalism is
> a
> | > FACT. The vast uninformed society is a FACT. Apple's upper-level
> quality
> | > (and price) are FACTS. Microsoft's predatory practices are FACTS. I
> don't
> | > dispute that "the world is moving", but it's moving at a snail's pace
> | > toward something nobody can yet foresee.
> | >
> | >> XP may suit your purposes, obviously it does, but that means little.
> | >
> | > Means a heck of a lot to me and everyone who uses it!
> | >
> | >> Wouldn't you rather run an OS which can be changed today, rather than
> | >> waiting a month or never, to have something fixed.
> | >
> | > No. I would not want my machine used as a test box every day.
> | >
> | >>Wouldn't you rather have
> | >> manufacturers working WITH users, rather than with Microsoft.
> | >
> | > Work with users in what way? I'd rather the hardware and the OS code
> got
> | > along, thank you, and I don't think it should be the OS getting
> changed
> | > every day in order to keep up with every whim of every hardware
> developer
> | > out there, much less the hardware manufacturers' "users". Again, you
> are
> | > describing chaos.
> | >
> | >>Wouldn't you
> | >> rather have thousands of code knowledgeable people helping to protect
> you
> | >> [with the opposite of course, but that's in Windows also so the
> | >> comparison
> | >> is negated].
> | >
> | > Where do you get these "thousands of code-knowledgeable people"? And
> how
> | > am I supposed to choose who to listen to? No, now that I think abou
> tit,
> | > the LAST thing I want is a bunch of "code-knowledgeable people"
> helping
> | > me. I want other USERS helping me. I want the code people to busy
> | > themselves keeping the code in good order and I want them to ALL BE ON
> THE
> | > SAME TEAM!
> | >
> | >> Don't you wonder why Windows is supposedly mostly a secret coding,
> yet
> | >> just
> | >> about everyone can hack it [from 7 or 8 year olds up]? Why would you
> | >> support
> | >> a system in which the key features cause numerous issues of their
> own?
> | >
> | > No, I never wondered that. I knew the answer without having to
> actually
> | > ask the question. It's akin to a law of nature. But you imply that the
> | > other OSes are hack proof, or inherently less insecure, that they are
> | > without faults in logic, without vulnerabilities just as nasty as the
> ones
> | > you bemoan in WIndows, and that's a crock.
> | >
> | > And you still don't get it -- I have no big attachment to XP other
> than
> | > it's what gets the job done for me and none of the others could come
> | > close. My only other observation is that XP/Vista appear to be
> maintaining
> | > their share, or losing it at a snails pace at worst, and that this is
> due
> | > to basic capitalism. Microsoft, or anyone who seeks to replace them,
> need
> | > a brand new bag altogether, but I prefer the current state of affairs
> to
> | > the chaos you describe.
> | >
> | >> Ask yourself why you WOULD ignore these things, why you fight so
> | >> desperately to further an OS which you admit is not what it purports
> to
> | >> be.... Your ideas and arguments fall flat, by your own writings...
> | >
> | > How is it that you keep seeing me as "fighting" for XP/Vista/whatever?
> I
> | > have no dog in this fight. I just want the winner when the dust
> settles.
> | > For the last several years, that's been Windows XP and now this
> mongrel
> | > Vista.
> | >
> | >> Gary, the reason I'M here, is I have a small part in this monster
> called
> | >> Microsoft. I participated in the very earliest stages, provided the
> error
> | >> reports and suggestions, downloaded by long distance and at MY cost
> the
> | >> files by 2400 then 14.4 then 33.6 modem, defended [verbally] the
> parties
> | >> who
> | >> brought windows to the business world and were FIRED AND SUED for
> doing
> | >> so,
> | >> did the beta testing until Microsoft started CHARGING [how dense am
> I,
> ah
> | >> yeah, I supply the computer system which Microsoft trashes and which
> I
> | >> PAY
> | >> to have trashed] and a number of other things which I now regret....
> no
> | >> matter how trivial or insignificant my part or input was, this 9X
> | >> environment is something I participated in and THOUGHT the world
> needed
> | >> [it
> | >> was, it brought computing to the masses as you indicate]. The NT
> | >> environment, which I also worked with though NEVER recommended, has,
> per
> | >> my
> | >> own testing, never been a good replacement for Unix or other servers.
> | >> That
> | >> it was forced into the home environment under false pretences is
> | >> something I
> | >> can not support. My position on XP was stated YEARS ago in this
> group,
> I
> | >> will never recommend it unless something changes, which SP3 did not
> | >> completely do.
> | >
> | > As PA Bear implied, you tend toward the Quixotic. I don't care about
> your
> | > theories and academic opinions, your howling in the night. Your
> worldview
> | > is at odds with reality.
> | >
> | > --
> | > Gary S. Terhune
> | > MS-MVP Shell/User
> | > www.grystmill.com
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

Why must you harp on the obvious? I, personally, would recommend not running
QT at all, and I don't, not even on my XP systems. But lots of people use
certain types of files that only QT will handle, or in the case at hand,
it's inexorably combined with her camera software (a very old camera with no
twain driver, IIRC, though I'll learn more as time passes.) And she has
irreplaceable MOV files that are dear to her heart...

So, what would YOU recommend? Leave in the old QT the way it is, or update
it and hope that uninstalling the old version is a major part of that
update.

And, please tell us, what is the alternative to Sun Java these days?

Ginny is shopping for a new machine, XP probably, but she may be forced to
Vista, and she can't afford a Mac and she'll not want the total new learning
experience that Linux would entail... So what do you recommend?

Again, you are complaining about security in legacy applications when
they're being run on a totally insecure and obsolete system in the first
place.

Oh, and FYI, I downloaded QT v. 6.5.2, since that is the last one the works
on 9x.

Really, Maurice. What would you have us do? Pull the power cords? Live in
perpetual fear of the inevitable bugs and vulnerabilities in software that
is racing to keep up with the demands of the YouTube generation?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com


"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%232u%23DzgwIHA.1436@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> SEE APPLE QuickTime US CERT warnings/alert I posted in this group on
> 04/04/2008 [see suggestion and, responses provided alternatives or
> recommendations], also see older QT warnings this group and elsewhere..
>
> REFERENCE
> National Cyber Alert System
> Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-094A
> Apple Updates for Multiple Vulnerabilities
> Original release date: April 3, 2008
>
> SEE ALSO:
> "One of the fastest growing threats - the web site you visit" - MEB
> 05/01/2008 - this group, ignore the more ignorant responses [consider with
> the Flash vulnerabilities FINALLY addressed, though its still vulnerable].
> AND:
> SUN JAVA Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-066A - posted here 03-07-2008
> if you intend to use SUN.
> ,
>
> --
> MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
> --
> _________
>
> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> news:uib%23sCWwIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | Decided to run the latest installer I have to see if it tells you up
> front
> | what version... There it was in huge letters. 6.5.1. And it was released
> | prior to December '04, not '05. Another of my many brain farts today.
> What
> | IS strange is that I have no versions prior to that in the places I'd
> expect
> | to find them. I'm a true packrat when it comes to that kind of stuff.
> Gotta
> | be earlier versions here, somewhere. Ahh, here we go. Versions 4 & 5...
> All
> | I'm missing is 3 and I just didn't feel like waiting for Search to
> complete
> | inspection of my vast ZIPped archives, my backups of backups, etc.
> |
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> | "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> | news:u0r7OqVwIHA.5288@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | >I do know that QT version 5 at least works on Win98SE. I stopped
> there,
> | >as I started getting tired of the bloat (as is so often the case) with
> the
> | >newer versions.
> | >
> | > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> | >> Leave it for now. I'll have you a full answer tomorrow if I can. What
> | >> you've
> | >> probably got is the same ancient, dangerous, version that MEB was
> | >> complaining about. We need to find the latest version that will still
> run
> | >> on
> | >> 9x. I'm may have it, but I'm in the middle of rebuilding my 98 box so
> I
> | >> can't test and make sure, know how to instruct you in its
> installation,
> | >> etc.
> | >>
> | >> (Actually, I coulda sworn I found v.6 on the QT site and that it
> works
> | >> with
> | >> Win98, but I guess I'll have to go through my History to find it.
> | >> Assuming I
> | >> don't already have it. Latest version I could find quickly was one I
> | >> downloaded in late '05.)
> | >>
> | >> --
> | >> Gary S. Terhune
> | >> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >> www.grystmill.com
> | >>
> | >> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >> news:483e4acf$0$25060$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>> I googled one of the missing Quick Time files QT32INST.EXE
> downloaded
> it
> | >>> and ran it
> | >>> and it repaired Quick Time. It even installed the QTW32DEL.EXE that
> was
> | >>> missing. Now
> | >>> I have both of the Quick Time logos QT & QT32 in my add/remove
> programs
> | >>> and in
> | >>> Control Panel. I don't believe the QT one works but my movies are
> | >>> playing
> | >>> well,
> | >>> automatically with the Quick Time 32. So I am leaving it alone as I
> am
> | >>> sure there are
> | >>> shared files. Unless anyone has any ideas as to how to get rid of it
> | >>> without hurting
> | >>> Quick Time 32.
> | >>>
> | >>>
> | >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>> news:uPfCyEUwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> | >>>> I need YOU to be more patient. And to stop posting wherever you
> feel
> | >>>> like
> | >>>> it. I know this is a long and multi-threaded issue, but it's your
> | >>>> responsibility to find the proper thread and post to respond to. If
> you
> | >>>> think it's missing, then at least go back to the top of this thread
> | >>>> ("IE
> | >>>> works so far", not "What is Quick Time") to post your "I'm lost"
> post.
> | >>>> While
> | >>>> this was intended to be a wrap-up thread for the original issue,
> you're
> | >>>> now
> | >>>> tacking new issues onto it, like this whole Sygate/QT thread. No
> need
> | >>>> to
> | >>>> further muck up the works by adding more to this sub-thread.
> | >>>>
> | >>>> So be patient, I have had to answer lots of posts today and some in
> | >>>> depth,
> | >>>> and I've done a lot of research on your part and on the part of
> others.
> | >>>> I
> | >>>> also had to rebuild my 98 machine, eat, etc., etc. And because you
> | >>>> posted
> | >>>> these MSXML questions here instead of where they belong, *I* have
> to
> go
> | >>>> searching for wherever in this mess the posts regarding MSXML
> update,
> | >>>> etc.,
> | >>>> is located. I'll post/repost there and answer your question(s)
> there.
> | >>>>
> | >>>> --
> | >>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>
> | >>>>
> | >>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>> news:483e2660$0$25036$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>> I need you to read my most recent postings.
> | >>>>> !. I am confused about the MSXML4sp2 updated and what to delete. I
> | >>>>> need
> | >>>>> it
> | >>>>> explained more clearly, please.
> | >>>>> 2. Quick Time doesn't have an uninstaller. When I hit add/remove
> | >>>>> programs
> | >>>>> it
> | >>>>> said it was uninstalling my Camedia (the program I attach my
> digital
> | >>>>> camera
> | >>>>> to the computer...that was o.k.
> | >>>>> But, there is nothing that says uninstall quick Time, It only
> gives
> | >>>>> the
> | >>>>> option to remove extensions. (in add/remove programs) and it says
> that
> | >>>>> I
> | >>>>> shouldn't do that.
> | >>>>> In Internet Options when I click it. It tells me that I should
> | >>>>> uninstall
> | >>>>> and
> | >>>>> install again as I am missing 2 exe files.
> | >>>>> If I put the CD in the drive....will that give me an option to
> | >>>>> uninstall?
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> | >>>>> From: "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
> | >>>>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
> | >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 11:21 PM
> | >>>>> Subject: Re: IE Running well so far
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>> Then you DO have that very old version MEB was talking about. You
> | >>>>>> should
> | >>>>>> uninstall it, then hope your banking site doesn't require it.
> Might
> | >>>>>> just
> | >>>>>> look different but still work. (I thought I had a link to the
> last
> | >>>>>> version
> | >>>>>> that worked with Win98, but I'll have to look deeper.)
> | >>>>>>
> | >>>>>> --
> | >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>>>
> | >>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>>> news:483e04fb$0$15193$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>>> Sorry, Gary I got side tracked trying to get online again. I
> will
> | >>>>>>> uninstall that
> | >>>>>>> update(4.0sdk).
> | >>>>>>> The 2 Q Times are in Internet Options- Control Panel. Q time
> says
> if
> | >>>>>>> I
> | >>>>>>> uninstall it I
> | >>>>>>> will uninstall the program it came with. I haven't the slightest
> | >>>>>>> idea
> | >>>>> what
> | >>>>>>> it came
> | >>>>>>> with . It is not in any of my Programs under Start. Further
> | >>>>>>> investigation
> | >>>>>>> shows that
> | >>>>>>> the version is 2.1.2.59 (Quick Time for Windows) It says it is
> for
> | >>>>>>> Window 95 and is missing QT32INST.EXE AND QTW32EEL.EXE....which
> is
> | >>>>>>> why
> | >>>>>>> I
> | >>>>>>> can't open
> | >>>>>>> it. It says I should uninstall and reinstall but I don't know
> what
> | >>>>>>> CD
> | >>>>> it
> | >>>>>>> would be on
> | >>>>>>> to re-install.
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> I will uninstall the 4.0sp1 now, after I make sure I can get
> online.
> | >>>>>>> Gin
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>> news:u44BNBOwIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | >>>>>>>> You still have MSXML 4.0 SP1. Here's some updates you might
> want
> to
> | >>>>>>>> consider:
> | >>>>>>>> First, uninstall that Update we installed that includes the
> SDK.
> If
> | >>>>>>>> you're
> | >>>>>>>> not sure which one, write down any entry that includes MSXML
> and
> | >>>>>>>> post
> | >>>>> it
> | >>>>>>>> here. After uninstalling that, then get:
> | >>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>> MSXML 4.0 Service Pack 2 http://tinyurl.com/59qer
> | >>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>> then this patch:
> | >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/y6a2sl
> | >>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>> --
> | >>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>>> news:483cf7f0$0$15192$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>>>>> All three are version 4.10.9404.0 and they were all created
> | >>>>>>>>> 2/4/02.
> | >>>>>>>>> msxml4.dll is 80.5 KB, msxml4r.dll is 1.17 MB, msxml4a.dll is
> | >>>>>>>>> 43.5
> | >>>>> KB.
> | >>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>>
> | >>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>> news:483e234b$0$25024$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>> One of my posts has 'gone missing' and I'm sitting here unclear
> about
> | >>>>>> how
> | >>>>>> to do
> | >>>>> this
> | >>>>>> service patch . I downloaded msxml4-KB927978-enu.exe (file
> version
> | >>>>>> 1)....., (I
> | >>>>> typed
> | >>>>>> in tinyurl.com/y6a2sl and it redirected me to this MSXML 4.0
> Service
> | >>>>>> Pack2
> | >>>>>> (Microsoft XML Core Services) - I think that is what I
> downloaded.
> Is
> | >>>>>> that the
> | >>>>> first
> | >>>>>> one or the second one??
> | >>>>>> Also....What am I supposed to post here and uninstall from my
> | >>>>>> system???
> | >>>>>> I am
> | >>>>>> confused. Thanks. Gin
> | >>>>>>
> | >>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>>>>> news:eVflMSTwIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | >>>>>>> Sygate uses a database that started out blank. *Everything* you
> do
> | >>>>>>> for
> | >>>>>>> a
> | >>>>>>> while will be a "change" to Sygate. If it's a program you
> recognize,
> | >>>>>>> then,
> | >>>>>>> short of doing a lot more research, you have no choice but to
> trust
> | >>>>>>> that
> | >>>>>>> it's not a malware DLL in disguise, and approve the update to
> | >>>>>>> Sygate's
> | >>>>>>> database. Once you've finished training it, then when it says
> | >>>>>>> "change"
> | >>>>>>> it
> | >>>>>>> will almost always actually mean "change". Then you are expected
> to
> | >>>>>>> be
> | >>>>>>> able
> | >>>>>>> to remember recent changes to your system and update Sygate
> | >>>>>>> appropriately.
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> If it's a question you have about the program that is being
> cited,
> | >>>>>>> like
> | >>>>>>> you
> | >>>>>>> did with QT, then you do as you did: ask about it, do some
> research.
> | >>>>>>> But try
> | >>>>>>> to refrain from acting on our advice, or even stuff you read
> | >>>>>>> elsewhere
> | >>>>>>> using
> | >>>>>>> Google, etc., too quickly, not even mine, in case there's an
> | >>>>>>> important
> | >>>>>>> (or
> | >>>>>>> even minor) correction, contradiction or addendum to that advice
> in
> | >>>>>>> the
> | >>>>>>> near
> | >>>>>>> future.
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> In this case, besides just what QT stands for, you should have
> | >>>>>>> learned
> | >>>>>>> enough in this thread to ask yourself, "Just how old IS that
> | >>>>>>> QuickTime
> | >>>>>>> of
> | >>>>>>> mine, anyway?" and "Maybe I should uninstall it and then install
> the
> | >>>>>>> latest
> | >>>>>>> version if I find I need it later." So, in a way, Sygate is
> teaching
> | >>>>>>> you,
> | >>>>>>> too.
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> --
> | >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>> news:483df8c8$0$25052$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>>>> I don't mind training something. I simply don;t know if it is
> o.k.
> | >>>>>>>> to
> | >>>>>>>> allow
> | >>>>>>>> every
> | >>>>>>>> program to add new .dlls to my Internet Explorer and Outlook
> | >>>>>>>> Express. If
> | >>>>>>>> it is
> | >>>>>>>> harmless, I will simply say yes. and go about my business. But
> it
> | >>>>>>>> seems to
> | >>>>>>>> me we
> | >>>>>>>> spent an awful lot of time getting rid of .dlls that didn't
> belong
> | >>>>>>>> and
> | >>>>>>>> putting in
> | >>>>>>>> .dlls that had disappeared. My question was simple. Do I allow
> my
> | >>>>>>>> Internet
> | >>>>>>>> Explorer
> | >>>>>>>> and Outlook Express to be changed by my programs.
> | >>>>>>>> It doesn't say that Sygate is changing anything. It is Sygate
> | >>>>>>>> reporting to
> | >>>>>>>> me that
> | >>>>>>>> these programs are changing my IE & OE. I assumed that before
> | >>>>>>>> Sygate,
> | >>>>>>>> my
> | >>>>>>>> programs
> | >>>>>>>> were doing this but I just didn't know. Am I making any sense?
> | >>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>>> news:%239wnV0RwIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> | >>>>>>>>> My guess is that the page you went to includes items that are
> | >>>>>>>>> viewed
> | >>>>>>>>> using a
> | >>>>>>>>> QT plugin. What you describe (QT and QT32) sound like plugins
> and
> | >>>>>>>>> they
> | >>>>>>>>> are
> | >>>>>>>>> just different versions of the same thing (16-bit and 32-bit),
> | >>>>>>>>> installed
> | >>>>>>>>> by
> | >>>>>>>>> the same installer. Where are these things listed in Internet
> | >>>>>>>>> Options? On
> | >>>>>>>>> what tab, under what button? (Sorry, I can't check against my
> | >>>>>>>>> system
> | >>>>>>>>> as I
> | >>>>>>>>> am
> | >>>>>>>>> in the process of rebuilding it.) Anyway, if it bugs you, just
> | >>>>>>>>> uninstall
> | >>>>>>>>> QT
> | >>>>>>>>> in Add/Remove Programs and see what happens. You can always go
> | >>>>>>>>> back
> | >>>>>>>>> and
> | >>>>>>>>> reinstall it if you discover you need it.
> | >>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>> But your biggest problem is that you can't stand having to
> train
> | >>>>>>>>> that
> | >>>>>>>>> firewall. If you aren't willing to go through that process,
> | >>>>>>>>> uninstall it
> | >>>>>>>>> and
> | >>>>>>>>> either use something else or nothing at all. You already have
> | >>>>>>>>> pretty
> | >>>>>>>>> decent
> | >>>>>>>>> protection against intrusion. Believe me, that firewall isn't
> | >>>>>>>>> done
> | >>>>>>>>> bugging
> | >>>>>>>>> you, not by a LONG shot.
> | >>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>> --
> | >>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>>>> news:483de66d$0$11610$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>>>>>> I have Quick Time and Quick Time32 in my Internet Options. I
> | >>>>>>>>>> have
> | >>>>>>>>>> Quick
> | >>>>>>>>>> Time in
> | >>>>>>>>>> Add/Remove programs. I went to Chase to transfer some money
> to
> | >>>>>>>>>> my
> | >>>>>>>>>> son
> | >>>>>>>>>> and
> | >>>>>>>>>> another
> | >>>>>>>>>> popup occurred saying: "Quick Time has install the following
> | >>>>>>>>>> (long
> | >>>>>>>>>> list)
> | >>>>>>>>>> of
> | >>>>>>>>>> components to your system, do you want them to access the
> | >>>>>>>>>> internet."
> | >>>>>>>>>> Why
> | >>>>>>>>>> would I want
> | >>>>>>>>>> them to access the internet and change my Internet Explorer
> | >>>>>>>>>> while
> | >>>>>>>>>> I am
> | >>>>>>>>>> trying to do
> | >>>>>>>>>> banking??? When I said 'no' , I was unable to continue. I
> would
> | >>>>>>>>>> like to
> | >>>>>>>>>> uninstall
> | >>>>>>>>>> both of them. (I only have uninstall for QT) and I don't know
> | >>>>>>>>>> what
> | >>>>>>>>>> QT32
> | >>>>>>>>>> is!!! A
> | >>>>>>>>>> little hint please. I am going to try again to get into my
> | >>>>>>>>>> bank.
> | >>>>>>>>>> Ginny
> | >>>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>>>>> news:utbNAQRwIHA.4772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> | >>>>>>>>>>> Don't be. It's not your fault MEB got up on the wrong side
> of
> | >>>>>>>>>>> the
> | >>>>>>>>>>> bed
> | >>>>>>>>>>> this
> | >>>>>>>>>>> morning and/or is otherwise distracted, or so it seems.
> Though
> | >>>>>>>>>>> I
> | >>>>>>>>>>> must
> | >>>>>>>>>>> say
> | >>>>>>>>>>> it's interesting to see his true colors when it comes to his
> | >>>>>>>>>>> feelings
> | >>>>>>>>>>> about
> | >>>>>>>>>>> XP.
> | >>>>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>>>> --
> | >>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> | >>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> | >>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> | >>>>>>>>>>>
> | >>>>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | >>>>>>>>>>> news:483dd8cc$1$11631$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> | >>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry I asked!!! Ginny
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>
 
Re: What is Quick Time

Re: What is Quick Time

No Gary, I thought you were helping setup her computer just some FYI
reminders.
You LIMIT, via the firewall, EXACTLY where QT can be used, by SITE. Same as
for any troublesome application.... she needs it for the bank, then that's
what it is allowed to connect with, she needs it only for local materials,
then it gets no outside access...
As for JAVA, this box still uses Microsoft's version... guess what, that
LIMITS what hacks can be used...

98 CAN be made secure enough to use for "most" of the Internet with a little
thought applied.

As for the UTUBE generation,, well, I deal with them almost daily, they
aren't very impressive nor do they care much ... then again I suppose such
was said about us, but the leverage is: dis ain't loud music er da tv, dis
be da world and it eats da dumb fer breakfast...

--
MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
--
_________

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
news:eylFErhwIHA.2188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| Why must you harp on the obvious? I, personally, would recommend not
running
| QT at all, and I don't, not even on my XP systems. But lots of people use
| certain types of files that only QT will handle, or in the case at hand,
| it's inexorably combined with her camera software (a very old camera with
no
| twain driver, IIRC, though I'll learn more as time passes.) And she has
| irreplaceable MOV files that are dear to her heart...
|
| So, what would YOU recommend? Leave in the old QT the way it is, or update
| it and hope that uninstalling the old version is a major part of that
| update.
|
| And, please tell us, what is the alternative to Sun Java these days?
|
| Ginny is shopping for a new machine, XP probably, but she may be forced to
| Vista, and she can't afford a Mac and she'll not want the total new
learning
| experience that Linux would entail... So what do you recommend?
|
| Again, you are complaining about security in legacy applications when
| they're being run on a totally insecure and obsolete system in the first
| place.
|
| Oh, and FYI, I downloaded QT v. 6.5.2, since that is the last one the
works
| on 9x.
|
| Really, Maurice. What would you have us do? Pull the power cords? Live in
| perpetual fear of the inevitable bugs and vulnerabilities in software that
| is racing to keep up with the demands of the YouTube generation?
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
|
| "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:%232u%23DzgwIHA.1436@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > SEE APPLE QuickTime US CERT warnings/alert I posted in this group on
| > 04/04/2008 [see suggestion and, responses provided alternatives or
| > recommendations], also see older QT warnings this group and elsewhere..
| >
| > REFERENCE
| > National Cyber Alert System
| > Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-094A
| > Apple Updates for Multiple Vulnerabilities
| > Original release date: April 3, 2008
| >
| > SEE ALSO:
| > "One of the fastest growing threats - the web site you visit" - MEB
| > 05/01/2008 - this group, ignore the more ignorant responses [consider
with
| > the Flash vulnerabilities FINALLY addressed, though its still
vulnerable].
| > AND:
| > SUN JAVA Technical Cyber Security Alert TA08-066A - posted here
03-07-2008
| > if you intend to use SUN.
| > ,
| >
| > --
| > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
| > --
| > _________
| >
| > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > news:uib%23sCWwIHA.3780@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | Decided to run the latest installer I have to see if it tells you up
| > front
| > | what version... There it was in huge letters. 6.5.1. And it was
released
| > | prior to December '04, not '05. Another of my many brain farts today.
| > What
| > | IS strange is that I have no versions prior to that in the places I'd
| > expect
| > | to find them. I'm a true packrat when it comes to that kind of stuff.
| > Gotta
| > | be earlier versions here, somewhere. Ahh, here we go. Versions 4 &
5...
| > All
| > | I'm missing is 3 and I just didn't feel like waiting for Search to
| > complete
| > | inspection of my vast ZIPped archives, my backups of backups, etc.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Gary S. Terhune
| > | MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | www.grystmill.com
| > |
| > | "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
| > | news:u0r7OqVwIHA.5288@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | >I do know that QT version 5 at least works on Win98SE. I stopped
| > there,
| > | >as I started getting tired of the bloat (as is so often the case)
with
| > the
| > | >newer versions.
| > | >
| > | > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| > | >> Leave it for now. I'll have you a full answer tomorrow if I can.
What
| > | >> you've
| > | >> probably got is the same ancient, dangerous, version that MEB was
| > | >> complaining about. We need to find the latest version that will
still
| > run
| > | >> on
| > | >> 9x. I'm may have it, but I'm in the middle of rebuilding my 98 box
so
| > I
| > | >> can't test and make sure, know how to instruct you in its
| > installation,
| > | >> etc.
| > | >>
| > | >> (Actually, I coulda sworn I found v.6 on the QT site and that it
| > works
| > | >> with
| > | >> Win98, but I guess I'll have to go through my History to find it.
| > | >> Assuming I
| > | >> don't already have it. Latest version I could find quickly was one
I
| > | >> downloaded in late '05.)
| > | >>
| > | >> --
| > | >> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>
| > | >> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >> news:483e4acf$0$25060$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>> I googled one of the missing Quick Time files QT32INST.EXE
| > downloaded
| > it
| > | >>> and ran it
| > | >>> and it repaired Quick Time. It even installed the QTW32DEL.EXE
that
| > was
| > | >>> missing. Now
| > | >>> I have both of the Quick Time logos QT & QT32 in my add/remove
| > programs
| > | >>> and in
| > | >>> Control Panel. I don't believe the QT one works but my movies are
| > | >>> playing
| > | >>> well,
| > | >>> automatically with the Quick Time 32. So I am leaving it alone as
I
| > am
| > | >>> sure there are
| > | >>> shared files. Unless anyone has any ideas as to how to get rid of
it
| > | >>> without hurting
| > | >>> Quick Time 32.
| > | >>>
| > | >>>
| > | >>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>> news:uPfCyEUwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
| > | >>>> I need YOU to be more patient. And to stop posting wherever you
| > feel
| > | >>>> like
| > | >>>> it. I know this is a long and multi-threaded issue, but it's your
| > | >>>> responsibility to find the proper thread and post to respond to.
If
| > you
| > | >>>> think it's missing, then at least go back to the top of this
thread
| > | >>>> ("IE
| > | >>>> works so far", not "What is Quick Time") to post your "I'm lost"
| > post.
| > | >>>> While
| > | >>>> this was intended to be a wrap-up thread for the original issue,
| > you're
| > | >>>> now
| > | >>>> tacking new issues onto it, like this whole Sygate/QT thread. No
| > need
| > | >>>> to
| > | >>>> further muck up the works by adding more to this sub-thread.
| > | >>>>
| > | >>>> So be patient, I have had to answer lots of posts today and some
in
| > | >>>> depth,
| > | >>>> and I've done a lot of research on your part and on the part of
| > others.
| > | >>>> I
| > | >>>> also had to rebuild my 98 machine, eat, etc., etc. And because
you
| > | >>>> posted
| > | >>>> these MSXML questions here instead of where they belong, *I* have
| > to
| > go
| > | >>>> searching for wherever in this mess the posts regarding MSXML
| > update,
| > | >>>> etc.,
| > | >>>> is located. I'll post/repost there and answer your question(s)
| > there.
| > | >>>>
| > | >>>> --
| > | >>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>
| > | >>>>
| > | >>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>> news:483e2660$0$25036$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>> I need you to read my most recent postings.
| > | >>>>> !. I am confused about the MSXML4sp2 updated and what to delete.
I
| > | >>>>> need
| > | >>>>> it
| > | >>>>> explained more clearly, please.
| > | >>>>> 2. Quick Time doesn't have an uninstaller. When I hit add/remove
| > | >>>>> programs
| > | >>>>> it
| > | >>>>> said it was uninstalling my Camedia (the program I attach my
| > digital
| > | >>>>> camera
| > | >>>>> to the computer...that was o.k.
| > | >>>>> But, there is nothing that says uninstall quick Time, It only
| > gives
| > | >>>>> the
| > | >>>>> option to remove extensions. (in add/remove programs) and it
says
| > that
| > | >>>>> I
| > | >>>>> shouldn't do that.
| > | >>>>> In Internet Options when I click it. It tells me that I should
| > | >>>>> uninstall
| > | >>>>> and
| > | >>>>> install again as I am missing 2 exe files.
| > | >>>>> If I put the CD in the drive....will that give me an option to
| > | >>>>> uninstall?
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
| > | >>>>> From: "Gary S. Terhune" <none>
| > | >>>>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion
| > | >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 11:21 PM
| > | >>>>> Subject: Re: IE Running well so far
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>> Then you DO have that very old version MEB was talking about.
You
| > | >>>>>> should
| > | >>>>>> uninstall it, then hope your banking site doesn't require it.
| > Might
| > | >>>>>> just
| > | >>>>>> look different but still work. (I thought I had a link to the
| > last
| > | >>>>>> version
| > | >>>>>> that worked with Win98, but I'll have to look deeper.)
| > | >>>>>>
| > | >>>>>> --
| > | >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>>>
| > | >>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>> news:483e04fb$0$15193$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>>> Sorry, Gary I got side tracked trying to get online again. I
| > will
| > | >>>>>>> uninstall that
| > | >>>>>>> update(4.0sdk).
| > | >>>>>>> The 2 Q Times are in Internet Options- Control Panel. Q time
| > says
| > if
| > | >>>>>>> I
| > | >>>>>>> uninstall it I
| > | >>>>>>> will uninstall the program it came with. I haven't the
slightest
| > | >>>>>>> idea
| > | >>>>> what
| > | >>>>>>> it came
| > | >>>>>>> with . It is not in any of my Programs under Start. Further
| > | >>>>>>> investigation
| > | >>>>>>> shows that
| > | >>>>>>> the version is 2.1.2.59 (Quick Time for Windows) It says it is
| > for
| > | >>>>>>> Window 95 and is missing QT32INST.EXE AND
QTW32EEL.EXE....which
| > is
| > | >>>>>>> why
| > | >>>>>>> I
| > | >>>>>>> can't open
| > | >>>>>>> it. It says I should uninstall and reinstall but I don't know
| > what
| > | >>>>>>> CD
| > | >>>>> it
| > | >>>>>>> would be on
| > | >>>>>>> to re-install.
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> I will uninstall the 4.0sp1 now, after I make sure I can get
| > online.
| > | >>>>>>> Gin
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>> news:u44BNBOwIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | >>>>>>>> You still have MSXML 4.0 SP1. Here's some updates you might
| > want
| > to
| > | >>>>>>>> consider:
| > | >>>>>>>> First, uninstall that Update we installed that includes the
| > SDK.
| > If
| > | >>>>>>>> you're
| > | >>>>>>>> not sure which one, write down any entry that includes MSXML
| > and
| > | >>>>>>>> post
| > | >>>>> it
| > | >>>>>>>> here. After uninstalling that, then get:
| > | >>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>> MSXML 4.0 Service Pack 2 http://tinyurl.com/59qer
| > | >>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>> then this patch:
| > | >>>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/y6a2sl
| > | >>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>> --
| > | >>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>>> news:483cf7f0$0$15192$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>>>>> All three are version 4.10.9404.0 and they were all created
| > | >>>>>>>>> 2/4/02.
| > | >>>>>>>>> msxml4.dll is 80.5 KB, msxml4r.dll is 1.17 MB, msxml4a.dll
is
| > | >>>>>>>>> 43.5
| > | >>>>> KB.
| > | >>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>>
| > | >>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>> news:483e234b$0$25024$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>> One of my posts has 'gone missing' and I'm sitting here unclear
| > about
| > | >>>>>> how
| > | >>>>>> to do
| > | >>>>> this
| > | >>>>>> service patch . I downloaded msxml4-KB927978-enu.exe (file
| > version
| > | >>>>>> 1)....., (I
| > | >>>>> typed
| > | >>>>>> in tinyurl.com/y6a2sl and it redirected me to this MSXML 4.0
| > Service
| > | >>>>>> Pack2
| > | >>>>>> (Microsoft XML Core Services) - I think that is what I
| > downloaded.
| > Is
| > | >>>>>> that the
| > | >>>>> first
| > | >>>>>> one or the second one??
| > | >>>>>> Also....What am I supposed to post here and uninstall from my
| > | >>>>>> system???
| > | >>>>>> I am
| > | >>>>>> confused. Thanks. Gin
| > | >>>>>>
| > | >>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>> news:eVflMSTwIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | >>>>>>> Sygate uses a database that started out blank. *Everything*
you
| > do
| > | >>>>>>> for
| > | >>>>>>> a
| > | >>>>>>> while will be a "change" to Sygate. If it's a program you
| > recognize,
| > | >>>>>>> then,
| > | >>>>>>> short of doing a lot more research, you have no choice but to
| > trust
| > | >>>>>>> that
| > | >>>>>>> it's not a malware DLL in disguise, and approve the update to
| > | >>>>>>> Sygate's
| > | >>>>>>> database. Once you've finished training it, then when it says
| > | >>>>>>> "change"
| > | >>>>>>> it
| > | >>>>>>> will almost always actually mean "change". Then you are
expected
| > to
| > | >>>>>>> be
| > | >>>>>>> able
| > | >>>>>>> to remember recent changes to your system and update Sygate
| > | >>>>>>> appropriately.
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> If it's a question you have about the program that is being
| > cited,
| > | >>>>>>> like
| > | >>>>>>> you
| > | >>>>>>> did with QT, then you do as you did: ask about it, do some
| > research.
| > | >>>>>>> But try
| > | >>>>>>> to refrain from acting on our advice, or even stuff you read
| > | >>>>>>> elsewhere
| > | >>>>>>> using
| > | >>>>>>> Google, etc., too quickly, not even mine, in case there's an
| > | >>>>>>> important
| > | >>>>>>> (or
| > | >>>>>>> even minor) correction, contradiction or addendum to that
advice
| > in
| > | >>>>>>> the
| > | >>>>>>> near
| > | >>>>>>> future.
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> In this case, besides just what QT stands for, you should have
| > | >>>>>>> learned
| > | >>>>>>> enough in this thread to ask yourself, "Just how old IS that
| > | >>>>>>> QuickTime
| > | >>>>>>> of
| > | >>>>>>> mine, anyway?" and "Maybe I should uninstall it and then
install
| > the
| > | >>>>>>> latest
| > | >>>>>>> version if I find I need it later." So, in a way, Sygate is
| > teaching
| > | >>>>>>> you,
| > | >>>>>>> too.
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> --
| > | >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>> news:483df8c8$0$25052$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>>>> I don't mind training something. I simply don;t know if it is
| > o.k.
| > | >>>>>>>> to
| > | >>>>>>>> allow
| > | >>>>>>>> every
| > | >>>>>>>> program to add new .dlls to my Internet Explorer and Outlook
| > | >>>>>>>> Express. If
| > | >>>>>>>> it is
| > | >>>>>>>> harmless, I will simply say yes. and go about my business.
But
| > it
| > | >>>>>>>> seems to
| > | >>>>>>>> me we
| > | >>>>>>>> spent an awful lot of time getting rid of .dlls that didn't
| > belong
| > | >>>>>>>> and
| > | >>>>>>>> putting in
| > | >>>>>>>> .dlls that had disappeared. My question was simple. Do I
allow
| > my
| > | >>>>>>>> Internet
| > | >>>>>>>> Explorer
| > | >>>>>>>> and Outlook Express to be changed by my programs.
| > | >>>>>>>> It doesn't say that Sygate is changing anything. It is Sygate
| > | >>>>>>>> reporting to
| > | >>>>>>>> me that
| > | >>>>>>>> these programs are changing my IE & OE. I assumed that before
| > | >>>>>>>> Sygate,
| > | >>>>>>>> my
| > | >>>>>>>> programs
| > | >>>>>>>> were doing this but I just didn't know. Am I making any
sense?
| > | >>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>>> news:%239wnV0RwIHA.2360@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
| > | >>>>>>>>> My guess is that the page you went to includes items that
are
| > | >>>>>>>>> viewed
| > | >>>>>>>>> using a
| > | >>>>>>>>> QT plugin. What you describe (QT and QT32) sound like
plugins
| > and
| > | >>>>>>>>> they
| > | >>>>>>>>> are
| > | >>>>>>>>> just different versions of the same thing (16-bit and
32-bit),
| > | >>>>>>>>> installed
| > | >>>>>>>>> by
| > | >>>>>>>>> the same installer. Where are these things listed in
Internet
| > | >>>>>>>>> Options? On
| > | >>>>>>>>> what tab, under what button? (Sorry, I can't check against
my
| > | >>>>>>>>> system
| > | >>>>>>>>> as I
| > | >>>>>>>>> am
| > | >>>>>>>>> in the process of rebuilding it.) Anyway, if it bugs you,
just
| > | >>>>>>>>> uninstall
| > | >>>>>>>>> QT
| > | >>>>>>>>> in Add/Remove Programs and see what happens. You can always
go
| > | >>>>>>>>> back
| > | >>>>>>>>> and
| > | >>>>>>>>> reinstall it if you discover you need it.
| > | >>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>> But your biggest problem is that you can't stand having to
| > train
| > | >>>>>>>>> that
| > | >>>>>>>>> firewall. If you aren't willing to go through that process,
| > | >>>>>>>>> uninstall it
| > | >>>>>>>>> and
| > | >>>>>>>>> either use something else or nothing at all. You already
have
| > | >>>>>>>>> pretty
| > | >>>>>>>>> decent
| > | >>>>>>>>> protection against intrusion. Believe me, that firewall
isn't
| > | >>>>>>>>> done
| > | >>>>>>>>> bugging
| > | >>>>>>>>> you, not by a LONG shot.
| > | >>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>> --
| > | >>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>>>> news:483de66d$0$11610$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>>>>>> I have Quick Time and Quick Time32 in my Internet Options.
I
| > | >>>>>>>>>> have
| > | >>>>>>>>>> Quick
| > | >>>>>>>>>> Time in
| > | >>>>>>>>>> Add/Remove programs. I went to Chase to transfer some money
| > to
| > | >>>>>>>>>> my
| > | >>>>>>>>>> son
| > | >>>>>>>>>> and
| > | >>>>>>>>>> another
| > | >>>>>>>>>> popup occurred saying: "Quick Time has install the
following
| > | >>>>>>>>>> (long
| > | >>>>>>>>>> list)
| > | >>>>>>>>>> of
| > | >>>>>>>>>> components to your system, do you want them to access the
| > | >>>>>>>>>> internet."
| > | >>>>>>>>>> Why
| > | >>>>>>>>>> would I want
| > | >>>>>>>>>> them to access the internet and change my Internet Explorer
| > | >>>>>>>>>> while
| > | >>>>>>>>>> I am
| > | >>>>>>>>>> trying to do
| > | >>>>>>>>>> banking??? When I said 'no' , I was unable to continue. I
| > would
| > | >>>>>>>>>> like to
| > | >>>>>>>>>> uninstall
| > | >>>>>>>>>> both of them. (I only have uninstall for QT) and I don't
know
| > | >>>>>>>>>> what
| > | >>>>>>>>>> QT32
| > | >>>>>>>>>> is!!! A
| > | >>>>>>>>>> little hint please. I am going to try again to get into my
| > | >>>>>>>>>> bank.
| > | >>>>>>>>>> Ginny
| > | >>>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>>>>> news:utbNAQRwIHA.4772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> Don't be. It's not your fault MEB got up on the wrong side
| > of
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> the
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> bed
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> this
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> morning and/or is otherwise distracted, or so it seems.
| > Though
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> I
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> must
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> say
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> it's interesting to see his true colors when it comes to
his
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> feelings
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> about
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> XP.
| > | >>>>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> --
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
| > | >>>>>>>>>>>
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> "CdLSRN" <ginnyrn5@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | >>>>>>>>>>> news:483dd8cc$1$11631$607ed4bc@cv.net...
| > | >>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry I asked!!! Ginny
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|
 
Back
Top