XP SP3 Details?

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> !6 updates! I haven't had a single problem as yet.

6 updates of what, Unknown? Windows versions, SPs, what? I don't
know my number but it doesn't really matter as I am conservative
enough that I make damn well sure whatever it is has been
thoroughly tested by end-users, where NGs like this one are so
valuable in lurk mode.

That said, the basic Murphy's Law says that just because you've
had 6 or 600 successes doesn't mean that the next one isn't some
heinous disaster. Therefore, I do not give Murphy an even break
ever and I don't trust to the probabilities, either. Incidently,
math gurus will tell you that you cannot prove either a possitive
or negative hypothsis by citing examples because all it takes is
ONE except to either prove or disprove the thesis.

For people who're running flush with the belief that they are
invulnerable are the ones most often the most P.O.'d when the
thing dies. It is said that the time most people decide to backup
their data is the day AFTER their HD crashes. A little late.

So, we both do what we think is best for us, right? Have a great
evening!

> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998E839C78A9BReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>> jour ...
>>
>>> I never automatically update anything. But when I do a
>>> manual update I carefully read what it applies to and then
>>> do it. Never had a problem. NVIDIA video driver is a classic
>>> example. I will say, there are some I refuse to download and
>>> install.
>>
>> Me, too, Unknown. I am just ready to restart after installing
>> the 2nd half of the August 14 updates. I lurk and wait, saw a
>> couple of problems reported but no one else moaned, so I
>> decided it was safe. And, yes, I DID set my own RP.
>>
>>> "Bogey Man" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
>>> news:O3PF$qA4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message
>>>> news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>>>> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only
>>>>> provides you with security updates. Never gives you an
>>>>> update for a driver for example. I do my updates manually
>>>>> and on at least two occasions stopped a download that
>>>>> should NOT have been presented.
>>>>
>>>> I would never let MS update automatically update any driver
>>>> for hardware. Get the updates from the manufacturer of the
>>>> equipment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

As I said, I do manual updates. After I clicked on Windows Update and
selected 'custom' there were 16 security updates available to download and
install.
"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998EAD547FBC5ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> !6 updates! I haven't had a single problem as yet.
>
> 6 updates of what, Unknown? Windows versions, SPs, what? I don't
> know my number but it doesn't really matter as I am conservative
> enough that I make damn well sure whatever it is has been
> thoroughly tested by end-users, where NGs like this one are so
> valuable in lurk mode.
>
> That said, the basic Murphy's Law says that just because you've
> had 6 or 600 successes doesn't mean that the next one isn't some
> heinous disaster. Therefore, I do not give Murphy an even break
> ever and I don't trust to the probabilities, either. Incidently,
> math gurus will tell you that you cannot prove either a possitive
> or negative hypothsis by citing examples because all it takes is
> ONE except to either prove or disprove the thesis.
>
> For people who're running flush with the belief that they are
> invulnerable are the ones most often the most P.O.'d when the
> thing dies. It is said that the time most people decide to backup
> their data is the day AFTER their HD crashes. A little late.
>
> So, we both do what we think is best for us, right? Have a great
> evening!
>
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998E839C78A9BReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>> jour ...
>>>
>>>> I never automatically update anything. But when I do a
>>>> manual update I carefully read what it applies to and then
>>>> do it. Never had a problem. NVIDIA video driver is a classic
>>>> example. I will say, there are some I refuse to download and
>>>> install.
>>>
>>> Me, too, Unknown. I am just ready to restart after installing
>>> the 2nd half of the August 14 updates. I lurk and wait, saw a
>>> couple of problems reported but no one else moaned, so I
>>> decided it was safe. And, yes, I DID set my own RP.
>>>
>>>> "Bogey Man" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:O3PF$qA4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message
>>>>> news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>>>>> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only
>>>>>> provides you with security updates. Never gives you an
>>>>>> update for a driver for example. I do my updates manually
>>>>>> and on at least two occasions stopped a download that
>>>>>> should NOT have been presented.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would never let MS update automatically update any driver
>>>>> for hardware. Get the updates from the manufacturer of the
>>>>> equipment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> As I said, I do manual updates. After I clicked on Windows
> Update and selected 'custom' there were 16 security updates

OK, !16 meant 16, ! was a shifted 1. But, I still don't
understand your comments. I successfully have installed all but a
handful of MS critical updates. Those did not fail, I chose not
to install them EVER because whilst lurking in these several NGs,
I discovered other people complaining about problems I thought
might affect me. So, I have been fortunate not to have had a
catastrophic failure of any sort, but I feel it is more because
of my dilligence in verifying what I am doing than in blind luck.

Have a great day!

> available to download and install.
> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998EAD547FBC5ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>> jour ...
>>
>>> !6 updates! I haven't had a single problem as yet.
>>
>> 6 updates of what, Unknown? Windows versions, SPs, what? I
>> don't know my number but it doesn't really matter as I am
>> conservative enough that I make damn well sure whatever it is
>> has been thoroughly tested by end-users, where NGs like this
>> one are so valuable in lurk mode.
>>
>> That said, the basic Murphy's Law says that just because
>> you've had 6 or 600 successes doesn't mean that the next one
>> isn't some heinous disaster. Therefore, I do not give Murphy
>> an even break ever and I don't trust to the probabilities,
>> either. Incidently, math gurus will tell you that you cannot
>> prove either a possitive or negative hypothsis by citing
>> examples because all it takes is ONE except to either prove
>> or disprove the thesis.
>>
>> For people who're running flush with the belief that they are
>> invulnerable are the ones most often the most P.O.'d when the
>> thing dies. It is said that the time most people decide to
>> backup their data is the day AFTER their HD crashes. A little
>> late.
>>
>> So, we both do what we think is best for us, right? Have a
>> great evening!
>>
>>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns998E839C78A9BReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>>> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
>>>> jour ...
>>>>
>>>>> I never automatically update anything. But when I do a
>>>>> manual update I carefully read what it applies to and then
>>>>> do it. Never had a problem. NVIDIA video driver is a
>>>>> classic example. I will say, there are some I refuse to
>>>>> download and install.
>>>>
>>>> Me, too, Unknown. I am just ready to restart after
>>>> installing the 2nd half of the August 14 updates. I lurk
>>>> and wait, saw a couple of problems reported but no one else
>>>> moaned, so I decided it was safe. And, yes, I DID set my
>>>> own RP.
>>>>
>>>>> "Bogey Man" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:O3PF$qA4HHA.5740@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:VKEwi.789$Oo.710@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>>>>>> One of the bad features of autoupdate is that it only
>>>>>>> provides you with security updates. Never gives you an
>>>>>>> update for a driver for example. I do my updates
>>>>>>> manually and on at least two occasions stopped a
>>>>>>> download that should NOT have been presented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would never let MS update automatically update any
>>>>>> driver for hardware. Get the updates from the
>>>>>> manufacturer of the equipment.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> HP, aka Jerry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>
>
>



--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Gerry]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever and a day
how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support.
Surely one group is sufficient.

--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


HEMI-Powered wrote:
> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> As I said, I do manual updates. After I clicked on Windows
>> Update and selected 'custom' there were 16 security updates
>
> OK, !16 meant 16, ! was a shifted 1. But, I still don't
> understand your comments. I successfully have installed all but a
> handful of MS critical updates. Those did not fail, I chose not
> to install them EVER because whilst lurking in these several NGs,
> I discovered other people complaining about problems I thought
> might affect me. So, I have been fortunate not to have had a
> catastrophic failure of any sort, but I feel it is more because
> of my dilligence in verifying what I am doing than in blind luck.
>
> Have a great day!
>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.ge
> neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely one
> group is sufficient.
>
Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know that
I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave post so
that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm sorry if you
think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post (I did do a
couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the previous testimony.

Now, what specifically are you alleging I am posting that is OT?
NOt all of what I've said, or what anyone says, is exactly on-
topic for the actual subject of the OP's thread, but that is the
way that threads evolve. There is no general MS NG for OT-style
posts but if we roll with the punches a little when people drift,
it makes life more pleasant, and any OT-ness can be quickly
ascertained and you just stop reading.

One more comment. It has been said before that sometimes people
are so ignorant of a problem they can't even ask an intelligent
question. So, if I chime into a thread with a personal
observations and somebody gives me a heads up that I'm missing
the boat, I take heed.

I suspect your issue in this thread is that there has been a LOT
of discussion from many people about the nature of the software
biz, that may the source of your angst. Don't you ever recant
stories from your youth in support of why you're experienced
enough to do what you do today? And, please feel free to exercise
your rights to ignore or plonk me if you think I am single-handed
monopolizing so many of your fav NGs.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Gerry]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

What does this dialogue have to do with SP3?

Why does it require posting to three newsgroups?


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


HEMI-Powered wrote:
> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.ge
>> neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely one
>> group is sufficient.
>>
> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know that
> I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave post so
> that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm sorry if you
> think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post (I did do a
> couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the previous testimony.
>
> Now, what specifically are you alleging I am posting that is OT?
> NOt all of what I've said, or what anyone says, is exactly on-
> topic for the actual subject of the OP's thread, but that is the
> way that threads evolve. There is no general MS NG for OT-style
> posts but if we roll with the punches a little when people drift,
> it makes life more pleasant, and any OT-ness can be quickly
> ascertained and you just stop reading.
>
> One more comment. It has been said before that sometimes people
> are so ignorant of a problem they can't even ask an intelligent
> question. So, if I chime into a thread with a personal
> observations and somebody gives me a heads up that I'm missing
> the boat, I take heed.
>
> I suspect your issue in this thread is that there has been a LOT
> of discussion from many people about the nature of the software
> biz, that may the source of your angst. Don't you ever recant
> stories from your youth in support of why you're experienced
> enough to do what you do today? And, please feel free to exercise
> your rights to ignore or plonk me if you think I am single-handed
> monopolizing so many of your fav NGs.

 

[Doug W.]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Why don't you post to ten more NGs?
-
<PLONK>

"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998F814047BD8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.ge
>> neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely one
>> group is sufficient.
>>
> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know
> that
> I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave post
> so
> that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm sorry if you
> think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post (I did do a
> couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the previous
> testimony.
>
> Now, what specifically are you alleging I am posting that is
> OT?
> NOt all of what I've said, or what anyone says, is exactly on-
> topic for the actual subject of the OP's thread, but that is
> the
> way that threads evolve. There is no general MS NG for
> OT-style
> posts but if we roll with the punches a little when people
> drift,
> it makes life more pleasant, and any OT-ness can be quickly
> ascertained and you just stop reading.
>
> One more comment. It has been said before that sometimes
> people
> are so ignorant of a problem they can't even ask an
> intelligent
> question. So, if I chime into a thread with a personal
> observations and somebody gives me a heads up that I'm missing
> the boat, I take heed.
>
> I suspect your issue in this thread is that there has been a
> LOT
> of discussion from many people about the nature of the
> software
> biz, that may the source of your angst. Don't you ever recant
> stories from your youth in support of why you're experienced
> enough to do what you do today? And, please feel free to
> exercise
> your rights to ignore or plonk me if you think I am
> single-handed
> monopolizing so many of your fav NGs.
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

> What does this dialogue have to do with SP3?
>
> Why does it require posting to three newsgroups?
>
I still do not understand where you're coming from, I don't
understand why you don't just let it ride, and I don't understand
what you are accusing me of? Being experienced, being foolish,
defending MS, bashing MS, or what? And as for multiple NGs, people
post similar things to all three, so what is so God Damn wrong with
replying. Nobody has an Uzi to your head do they? Do everybody a
favor, if you hate me that much, just PLONK! and you're relieved.

Or, is the real reason you don't like what I've said about YOUR
views? Either way, I am comfortable, I've not seen the usual
flaming I get for being a contrarian, but what I HAVE seen is
constructive comments, even praise - and that coming from people
who don't even agree with me! Rant on, MacDuff.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Doug W. added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Why don't you post to ten more NGs?
> -
> <PLONK>
>
> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998F814047BD8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>> ...
>>
>>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.
>>> ge neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely
>>> one group is sufficient.
>>>
>> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know
>> that I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave
>> post so that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm
>> sorry if you think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post
>> (I did do a couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the
>> previous testimony.

I'll assume you plonked me and not my namesake, but either way, who
cares? BTW, anybody take notice on the very positive exchanges with
Ken Blake hereabouts? No, probably not. I have seen threads in this
and ALL the MS NGs as well as 24hoursupport go on for hundreds of
posts and weeks at a time, yet nobody seems to care. What makes
this one so different? And what, pray tell, is the "problem" with
making rational judgments about MS and subject of this thread, SP3?

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

You've got more understanding than that to make that type of comment. Cool
it.
"Doug W." <stand@attention> wrote in message
news:uKL1$MP4HHA.5852@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Why don't you post to ten more NGs?
> -
> <PLONK>
>
> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> news:Xns998F814047BD8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>>
>>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.ge
>>> neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely one
>>> group is sufficient.
>>>
>> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know that
>> I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave post so
>> that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm sorry if you
>> think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post (I did do a
>> couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the previous testimony.
>>
>> Now, what specifically are you alleging I am posting that is OT?
>> NOt all of what I've said, or what anyone says, is exactly on-
>> topic for the actual subject of the OP's thread, but that is the
>> way that threads evolve. There is no general MS NG for OT-style
>> posts but if we roll with the punches a little when people drift,
>> it makes life more pleasant, and any OT-ness can be quickly
>> ascertained and you just stop reading.
>>
>> One more comment. It has been said before that sometimes people
>> are so ignorant of a problem they can't even ask an intelligent
>> question. So, if I chime into a thread with a personal
>> observations and somebody gives me a heads up that I'm missing
>> the boat, I take heed.
>>
>> I suspect your issue in this thread is that there has been a LOT
>> of discussion from many people about the nature of the software
>> biz, that may the source of your angst. Don't you ever recant
>> stories from your youth in support of why you're experienced
>> enough to do what you do today? And, please feel free to exercise
>> your rights to ignore or plonk me if you think I am single-handed
>> monopolizing so many of your fav NGs.
>>
>> --
>> HP, aka Jerry
>

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Are you such a perfectionist that you have to complain about friendly
posts????
"Gerry" <gerry@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Onk1pJP4HHA.484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> What does this dialogue have to do with SP3?
>
> Why does it require posting to three newsgroups?
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Gerry
> ~~~~
> FCA
> Stourport, England
> Enquire, plan and execute
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
> HEMI-Powered wrote:
>> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>>
>>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.ge
>>> neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely one
>>> group is sufficient.
>>>
>> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know that
>> I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave post so
>> that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm sorry if you
>> think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post (I did do a
>> couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the previous testimony.
>>
>> Now, what specifically are you alleging I am posting that is OT?
>> NOt all of what I've said, or what anyone says, is exactly on-
>> topic for the actual subject of the OP's thread, but that is the
>> way that threads evolve. There is no general MS NG for OT-style
>> posts but if we roll with the punches a little when people drift,
>> it makes life more pleasant, and any OT-ness can be quickly
>> ascertained and you just stop reading.
>>
>> One more comment. It has been said before that sometimes people
>> are so ignorant of a problem they can't even ask an intelligent
>> question. So, if I chime into a thread with a personal
>> observations and somebody gives me a heads up that I'm missing
>> the boat, I take heed.
>>
>> I suspect your issue in this thread is that there has been a LOT
>> of discussion from many people about the nature of the software
>> biz, that may the source of your angst. Don't you ever recant
>> stories from your youth in support of why you're experienced
>> enough to do what you do today? And, please feel free to exercise
>> your rights to ignore or plonk me if you think I am single-handed
>> monopolizing so many of your fav NGs.
>
>

 

[db ´¯`·.. >]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

there is no rule against
cross posting, Hemi.

http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales/help/help_en-us.htm: cross-post
Adding a single post to more than one discussion group at the same time.
Cross-posting is an advanced feature and should only be used if you
really believe that more than one discussion group will be interested in
your thread.


btw:

Ditto on your observations.

Gerimandering the sub threads
is the problem.



--

db ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·..><)))x>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>¸.
><)))º>·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><)))º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><)))º>


..


"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns998F913E7B7F4ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Doug W. added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ...
>
>> Why don't you post to ten more NGs?
>> -
>> <PLONK>
>>
>> "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
>> news:Xns998F814047BD8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
>>> Gerry added these comments in the current discussion du jour
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> If you need to continues these off topic dialogues for ever
>>>> and a day how about snipping! Also do these posts need to
>>>> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.
>>>> ge neral,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support. Surely
>>>> one group is sufficient.
>>>>
>>> Gerry, if you have been following my comments, then you know
>>> that I DO snip the useless prior quotes as well as interleave
>>> post so that people can connect what I'm replying to. I'm
>>> sorry if you think I'm doing it wrong, but I seldom top post
>>> (I did do a couple recently) and I seldom repeat all the
>>> previous testimony.
>
> I'll assume you plonked me and not my namesake, but either way, who
> cares? BTW, anybody take notice on the very positive exchanges with
> Ken Blake hereabouts? No, probably not. I have seen threads in this
> and ALL the MS NGs as well as 24hoursupport go on for hundreds of
> posts and weeks at a time, yet nobody seems to care. What makes
> this one so different? And what, pray tell, is the "problem" with
> making rational judgments about MS and subject of this thread, SP3?
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry

 

[h1247]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

HEMI I enjoyed your post here but, there is one comment that I'd like to ask
you about --- "the original PC that didn't even have DOS, that came in with
the XT"--did you possibly mean to say CP/M, from the wonderful company that
was called DIGITAL RESEARCH? The reason I ask is because, I still have that
1st edition XT, that you speak of, downstairs in my garage. And if I cleaned
it up, plugged it in and "fired" it up, DOS would "magically" appear, and be
available for me to give that PC instructions. My first "PC" was a VIC-20 and
the next was that 4.77MHz IBM PC. And like you, I hung up my programmer hat
around 1992, because it wasn't fun anymore to me.

"HEMI-Powered" wrote:

> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
> ....
>
> > Wed at the hips----------???? Supposing you wrote the OS. How
> > would you control it and/or keep your customers happy. Many
> > companies write programs to run with XP (the OS) and when a
> > problem occurs, MS is immediately blamed. Be objective.
>
> Let's just say that I've been around MS more than long enough,
> all the way back to the original PC that didn't even have DOS,
> that came in with the XT, to understand them pretty well. I don't
> mean to be vindictively critical, but surely you will admit they
> have less than a stellar record of their own releases, they have
> a rep for hiding key parts of their various APIs even from those
> who buy their development packages all the way back to the SDK,
> reverse engineering of several versions of the major components
> of MS Office have been found to contain fairly large percentages
> of commands and API calls that seem not to be documented, and MS
> like all commercial companies reserves the rights to control its
> copyrighted software and give "guidance" to developers.
>
> I didn't say, BTW, that all problems are MS, I am not at all that
> naive and not at all an anti-MS bigot to believe that. Rogue and
> misbehaving applications, especially systems utilities of all
> kinds, are rampant throughout the 25 years since the first PC,
> they suffer from their own bugs, side-effects bugs, and the rush
> to bring new versions to market no matter what. This super
> competitiveness all the way around makes for not only strange
> bedfellows but interlocking dependencies that can make full
> diagnosis of major or even minor systems issue deceptively
> difficult.
>
> I hung up my programmer clothes circa 1995 or so, thus I am more
> than a little out-of-date for direct knowledge of whence I speak,
> but in monitoring this and many other NGs, I see no real signs of
> improvement, if anything, I think the situation is deteriorating.
> I'm sorry if you feel I am not being objective, let's just say
> that I am a pragmatist and always suspicious of extravagent
> claims from ANY developer on either side of problems. Thanks for
> listening.
>
> > "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
> > news:Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> >> Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du
> >> jour ...
> >>
> >>> Look closely at all the postings in this group. You'll be
> >>> amazed that most problems are not caused by MS but by Non MS
> >>> programs, reg cleaners, and virus detect/scan protection?
> >>> programs.
> >>
> >> That may well be true, but the major developers are wed at
> >> the hips body and soul to the God of Microsoft because they
> >> must play ball or risk losing their certification. But, it is
> >> certainly true that reg cleaners in the hands of the novices
> >> will wreck an otherwise good system and are more harm than
> >> good most of the time.
> >>
> >> --
> >> HP, aka Jerry
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry
>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

=?Utf-8?B?aDEyNDc=?= added these comments in the current
discussion du jour ...

> HEMI I enjoyed your post here but, there is one comment that
> I'd like to ask you about --- "the original PC that didn't
> even have DOS, that came in with the XT"--did you possibly
> mean to say CP/M, from the wonderful company that was called
> DIGITAL RESEARCH? The reason I ask is because, I still have
> that 1st edition XT, that you speak of, downstairs in my
> garage. And if I cleaned it up, plugged it in and "fired" it
> up, DOS would "magically" appear, and be available for me to
> give that PC instructions. My first "PC" was a VIC-20 and the
> next was that 4.77MHz IBM PC. And like you, I hung up my
> programmer hat around 1992, because it wasn't fun anymore to
> me.

The very, very first IBM PC came with just two floppy drives and
pretty much nothing else. DOS hadn't been invented yet. The only
software that was available had been written in assembly language
using only the BIOS for I/O. CP/M WAS an option, but in my
company, we actually waited a bit until IBM announced the XT with
DOS 1.0 and a 10 MB (!) HD.

I ran through 3 different Apple computers, the original ][, a
later //e, and a //c compact for my daughter. My first real PC
was what was then called a clone and had DOS 4.0 on it. Later, I
tried Windows 3.0 that say on top of DOS but to say it was
unstable was an understatement. Win 3.1 wasn't bad, then I went
to 95, passed up ME and 2000, and built new ones with XP. First,
just XP, then SP1. And, my current PC used an SP1 installed CD
with SP2 on a CD I'd ordered from MS.

BTW, I'll tell you how primative Apple's were in late 1978: they
didn't even have a floppy, as that takes some sort of O/S. So,
for almost a year, I saved my BASIC programs to audio cassette
tapes! We've come a long way, baby!

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

db ´¯`·.. ><)))º>` .. . added these comments in the current
discussion du jour ...

> there is no rule against
> cross posting, Hemi.
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales/help/help_en-us.htm:
> cross-post Adding a single post to more than one discussion
> group at the same time. Cross-posting is an advanced feature
> and should only be used if you really believe that more than
> one discussion group will be interested in your thread.
>
>
> btw:
>
> Ditto on your observations.
>
> Gerimandering the sub threads
> is the problem.
I do NOT crosspost myself, EVER. But, if I was replying to someone
who had, that would explain why MY replies appeared multiple
places.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Bob I]

Re: XP SP3 Details?



HEMI-Powered wrote:

> =?Utf-8?B?aDEyNDc=?= added these comments in the current
> discussion du jour ...
>
>
>>HEMI I enjoyed your post here but, there is one comment that
>>I'd like to ask you about --- "the original PC that didn't
>>even have DOS, that came in with the XT"--did you possibly
>>mean to say CP/M, from the wonderful company that was called
>>DIGITAL RESEARCH? The reason I ask is because, I still have
>>that 1st edition XT, that you speak of, downstairs in my
>>garage. And if I cleaned it up, plugged it in and "fired" it
>>up, DOS would "magically" appear, and be available for me to
>>give that PC instructions. My first "PC" was a VIC-20 and the
>>next was that 4.77MHz IBM PC. And like you, I hung up my
>>programmer hat around 1992, because it wasn't fun anymore to
>>me.
>
>
> The very, very first IBM PC came with just two floppy drives and
> pretty much nothing else. DOS hadn't been invented yet. The only
> software that was available had been written in assembly language
> using only the BIOS for I/O. CP/M WAS an option, but in my
> company, we actually waited a bit until IBM announced the XT with
> DOS 1.0 and a 10 MB (!) HD.
>
> I ran through 3 different Apple computers, the original ][, a
> later //e, and a //c compact for my daughter. My first real PC
> was what was then called a clone and had DOS 4.0 on it. Later, I
> tried Windows 3.0 that say on top of DOS but to say it was
> unstable was an understatement. Win 3.1 wasn't bad, then I went
> to 95, passed up ME and 2000, and built new ones with XP. First,
> just XP, then SP1. And, my current PC used an SP1 installed CD
> with SP2 on a CD I'd ordered from MS.
>
> BTW, I'll tell you how primative Apple's were in late 1978: they
> didn't even have a floppy, as that takes some sort of O/S. So,
> for almost a year, I saved my BASIC programs to audio cassette
> tapes! We've come a long way, baby!
>

I thinks XT came with PC-DOS 2.0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC-DOS

 

[Unknown]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Didn't it come with MS-DOS???
"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eZOw3n14HHA.556@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>
>
> HEMI-Powered wrote:
>
>> =?Utf-8?B?aDEyNDc=?= added these comments in the current
>> discussion du jour ...
>>>HEMI I enjoyed your post here but, there is one comment that
>>>I'd like to ask you about --- "the original PC that didn't
>>>even have DOS, that came in with the XT"--did you possibly
>>>mean to say CP/M, from the wonderful company that was called
>>>DIGITAL RESEARCH? The reason I ask is because, I still have
>>>that 1st edition XT, that you speak of, downstairs in my
>>>garage. And if I cleaned it up, plugged it in and "fired" it
>>>up, DOS would "magically" appear, and be available for me to
>>>give that PC instructions. My first "PC" was a VIC-20 and the
>>>next was that 4.77MHz IBM PC. And like you, I hung up my
>>>programmer hat around 1992, because it wasn't fun anymore to
>>>me.
>>
>>
>> The very, very first IBM PC came with just two floppy drives and pretty
>> much nothing else. DOS hadn't been invented yet. The only software that
>> was available had been written in assembly language using only the BIOS
>> for I/O. CP/M WAS an option, but in my company, we actually waited a bit
>> until IBM announced the XT with DOS 1.0 and a 10 MB (!) HD.
>>
>> I ran through 3 different Apple computers, the original ][, a later //e,
>> and a //c compact for my daughter. My first real PC was what was then
>> called a clone and had DOS 4.0 on it. Later, I tried Windows 3.0 that say
>> on top of DOS but to say it was unstable was an understatement. Win 3.1
>> wasn't bad, then I went to 95, passed up ME and 2000, and built new ones
>> with XP. First, just XP, then SP1. And, my current PC used an SP1
>> installed CD with SP2 on a CD I'd ordered from MS.
>>
>> BTW, I'll tell you how primative Apple's were in late 1978: they didn't
>> even have a floppy, as that takes some sort of O/S. So, for almost a
>> year, I saved my BASIC programs to audio cassette tapes! We've come a
>> long way, baby!
>>
>
> I thinks XT came with PC-DOS 2.0
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC-DOS
>

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

> I thinks XT came with PC-DOS 2.0
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC-DOS

That was circa 1982, a long time ago for my feeble brain, so maybe
you're right. I would comment, gently, that I don't believe most of
what wikipedia says in general because of their very loose rules
for editorial review of the correctness of submitted articles. You
could very well be right, that DOS 1.0 may have even come with the
floppy-only version. However, that wasn't my point.

The gist of the way this thread has gone OT is into nostalgic
rememberences of times gone by in an ON-topic way to explain why
even when the O/S was extremely simple and small by today's
standards, there were bugs, and there's been bugs ever since. And,
anyone who thinks that ANY software will EVER be "bug free"
(whatever that even means) is a naive fool or simply has no
previous experience.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Re: XP SP3 Details?

Unknown added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....

> Didn't it come with MS-DOS???

NO! Bill Gates showed himself even as a very young man to be a very
astute businessman. He wrote a license agreement some 150 pages
long for the IBM guys in Florida secretly developing the PC to
study and sign. Buried in it was that he maintained the rights to
sell it himself as MS-DOS. What IBM brand PCs had was a minor
variation that was called PC-DOS.

And then, of course, is the story of how Gates managed to con the
kernel of what because his DOS from a developer of an earlier O/S
that was competing with CP/M. He bought the exclusive rights for
just $50,000. Without that, he'd have not been able to meet IBM's
deadline that he'd already signed up for to provide an O/S to them.

--
HP, aka Jerry

 

[Bob I]

Re: XP SP3 Details?



HEMI-Powered wrote:

> Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>
>>I thinks XT came with PC-DOS 2.0
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC-DOS
>
>
> That was circa 1982, a long time ago for my feeble brain, so maybe
> you're right. I would comment, gently, that I don't believe most of
> what wikipedia says in general because of their very loose rules
> for editorial review of the correctness of submitted articles. You
> could very well be right, that DOS 1.0 may have even come with the
> floppy-only version. However, that wasn't my point.
>
> The gist of the way this thread has gone OT is into nostalgic
> rememberences of times gone by in an ON-topic way to explain why
> even when the O/S was extremely simple and small by today's
> standards, there were bugs, and there's been bugs ever since. And,
> anyone who thinks that ANY software will EVER be "bug free"
> (whatever that even means) is a naive fool or simply has no
> previous experience.
>

Not a problem in my book. We are all getting old ;-), but it beats the
alternative! As for OT, the original question was OT two of the 3
groups, and even for general it was a stretch! So we have a nice
dicsussion about operating systems and reality. No biggie.