XP SP3 Details?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jethro
  • Start date Start date
Re: XP SP3 Details?

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

>> 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.
>

Bob, please enlighten me: apparently some/all of my replies have
been showing up multiple places but I can assure everyone that I
do NOT cross-post. If the replies are somewhat similar, I may
have given similar advice elsewhere, but a couple of people have
said I am posting identical text to at least 3 NGs. That's news
to me. Usually, Xnews warns me when I am about to reply to
someone who originally cross-posted, but I've not seen that for
this particular thread, not originally, not the middle, and not
where we are now.

So, if anyone is annoyed at what I've said that you think is
inappropriate or excessively OT, I apologize for that. But, I am
NOT intentionally trying to circumvent conventions established by
MS for these NGs nor am I intentionally inciting to riot. But,
there seems to be at least some evidence that a couple of people
taking issue with me have their own over-sensitivity issues, so
I'm trying to bow out.

Ditto for the meandering FAT32 thread that refuses to die. I want
to leave that one as my questions have been answered, it no
longer has meaning to me, and further comments I might make could
educate me or even a lurker but are going too far afield from the
original intent of the OP. So, I'm trying to disengage there
also.

Again, what I'd really prefer NOT happen is for some silly abuse
reporting war start because those things sweep everybody up, as
every person that gets censured, temporarily suspended, or even
losing their account usually get pretty well pissed-off and
report everybody in sight that may have at all been a reporter of
them. Nobody wins those wars, I hope we can avoid it here.

Now, I think there's been some excellent discussion in this
thread even afield of what would be considered ON-topic. I've
received comments either directly or indirectly that people are
learning from each other, so that sounds like a good thing, even
though we stopped talking literally about SP3 some time ago.

Have a good evening, everyone!

--
HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

from microsoft the properties of
your / our postings for this
thread are as follows:

-----------------------------------

From: "HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,
microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support

Subject: Re: XP SP3 Details?
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 23:54:27 -0000
Organization: Car Picture Collector
Message-ID: <Xns9992CA923D4E8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
References: <t943c3td4tgkup1sgotds8se4h7l28u1mq@4ax.com>
<Xns998C4C542BEFBReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<OKqEGlm3HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
<Xns998C612062904ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<0wkwi.3795$i85.1885@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>
<Xns998C98FC72C16ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<fhnwi.57418$5j1.22777@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>
<Xns998CAD067DE20ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<BB03AA05-F14D-4C5D-A5E0-C1919C0F6927@microsoft.com>
<Xns99928AB226C2AReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<eZOw3n14HHA.556@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>
<Xns9992A7FC320A5ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30>
<eU1zW124HHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>

User-Agent: Xnews/06.12.01
X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com
Lines: 58
Path:
TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTFEEDS01.phx.gbl!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!image.surnet.ru!mtu.ru!sn-xt-sjc-04!sn-xt-sjc-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail

Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:1761357
microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support:771106
microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics:304175

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

--

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



..


"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns9992CA923D4E8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>>> 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.
>>

> Bob, please enlighten me: apparently some/all of my replies have
> been showing up multiple places but I can assure everyone that I
> do NOT cross-post. If the replies are somewhat similar, I may
> have given similar advice elsewhere, but a couple of people have
> said I am posting identical text to at least 3 NGs. That's news
> to me. Usually, Xnews warns me when I am about to reply to
> someone who originally cross-posted, but I've not seen that for
> this particular thread, not originally, not the middle, and not
> where we are now.
>
> So, if anyone is annoyed at what I've said that you think is
> inappropriate or excessively OT, I apologize for that. But, I am
> NOT intentionally trying to circumvent conventions established by
> MS for these NGs nor am I intentionally inciting to riot. But,
> there seems to be at least some evidence that a couple of people
> taking issue with me have their own over-sensitivity issues, so
> I'm trying to bow out.
>
> Ditto for the meandering FAT32 thread that refuses to die. I want
> to leave that one as my questions have been answered, it no
> longer has meaning to me, and further comments I might make could
> educate me or even a lurker but are going too far afield from the
> original intent of the OP. So, I'm trying to disengage there
> also.
>
> Again, what I'd really prefer NOT happen is for some silly abuse
> reporting war start because those things sweep everybody up, as
> every person that gets censured, temporarily suspended, or even
> losing their account usually get pretty well pissed-off and
> report everybody in sight that may have at all been a reporter of
> them. Nobody wins those wars, I hope we can avoid it here.
>
> Now, I think there's been some excellent discussion in this
> thread even afield of what would be considered ON-topic. I've
> received comments either directly or indirectly that people are
> learning from each other, so that sounds like a good thing, even
> though we stopped talking literally about SP3 some time ago.
>
> Have a good evening, everyone!
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

Your post (the one I'm repaying to) is cross-posted to windwosxp.basics,
windowsxp.general and windowsxp.help_and_support.

(Note, I have no problem with your X-posting, just thought I'd let you
know.)

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

"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns9992CA923D4E8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Bob I added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...
>
>>> 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.
>>

> Bob, please enlighten me: apparently some/all of my replies have
> been showing up multiple places but I can assure everyone that I
> do NOT cross-post. If the replies are somewhat similar, I may
> have given similar advice elsewhere, but a couple of people have
> said I am posting identical text to at least 3 NGs. That's news
> to me. Usually, Xnews warns me when I am about to reply to
> someone who originally cross-posted, but I've not seen that for
> this particular thread, not originally, not the middle, and not
> where we are now.
>
> So, if anyone is annoyed at what I've said that you think is
> inappropriate or excessively OT, I apologize for that. But, I am
> NOT intentionally trying to circumvent conventions established by
> MS for these NGs nor am I intentionally inciting to riot. But,
> there seems to be at least some evidence that a couple of people
> taking issue with me have their own over-sensitivity issues, so
> I'm trying to bow out.
>
> Ditto for the meandering FAT32 thread that refuses to die. I want
> to leave that one as my questions have been answered, it no
> longer has meaning to me, and further comments I might make could
> educate me or even a lurker but are going too far afield from the
> original intent of the OP. So, I'm trying to disengage there
> also.
>
> Again, what I'd really prefer NOT happen is for some silly abuse
> reporting war start because those things sweep everybody up, as
> every person that gets censured, temporarily suspended, or even
> losing their account usually get pretty well pissed-off and
> report everybody in sight that may have at all been a reporter of
> them. Nobody wins those wars, I hope we can avoid it here.
>
> Now, I think there's been some excellent discussion in this
> thread even afield of what would be considered ON-topic. I've
> received comments either directly or indirectly that people are
> learning from each other, so that sounds like a good thing, even
> though we stopped talking literally about SP3 some time ago.
>
> Have a good evening, everyone!
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?


HEMI-Powered wrote:

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

>
> Bob, please enlighten me: apparently some/all of my replies have
> been showing up multiple places but I can assure everyone that I
> do NOT cross-post. If the replies are somewhat similar, I may
> have given similar advice elsewhere, but a couple of people have
> said I am posting identical text to at least 3 NGs. That's news
> to me. Usually, Xnews warns me when I am about to reply to
> someone who originally cross-posted, but I've not seen that for
> this particular thread, not originally, not the middle, and not
> where we are now.
>
> So, if anyone is annoyed at what I've said that you think is
> inappropriate or excessively OT, I apologize for that. But, I am
> NOT intentionally trying to circumvent conventions established by
> MS for these NGs nor am I intentionally inciting to riot. But,
> there seems to be at least some evidence that a couple of people
> taking issue with me have their own over-sensitivity issues, so
> I'm trying to bow out.
>
> Ditto for the meandering FAT32 thread that refuses to die. I want
> to leave that one as my questions have been answered, it no
> longer has meaning to me, and further comments I might make could
> educate me or even a lurker but are going too far afield from the
> original intent of the OP. So, I'm trying to disengage there
> also.
>
> Again, what I'd really prefer NOT happen is for some silly abuse
> reporting war start because those things sweep everybody up, as
> every person that gets censured, temporarily suspended, or even
> losing their account usually get pretty well pissed-off and
> report everybody in sight that may have at all been a reporter of
> them. Nobody wins those wars, I hope we can avoid it here.
>
> Now, I think there's been some excellent discussion in this
> thread even afield of what would be considered ON-topic. I've
> received comments either directly or indirectly that people are
> learning from each other, so that sounds like a good thing, even
> though we stopped talking literally about SP3 some time ago.
>
> Have a good evening, everyone!
>


The thread was originally crossposted to and is currently crossposting to:

microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support

and FWIW I don't think anyone is particularly concerned about your
postings in this thread.

have a good one!
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns9992CA923D4E8ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...

> Bob, please enlighten me: apparently some/all of my replies have
> been showing up multiple places but I can assure everyone that I
> do NOT cross-post. If the replies are somewhat similar, I may
> have given similar advice elsewhere, but a couple of people have
> said I am posting identical text to at least 3 NGs. That's news
> to me. Usually, Xnews warns me when I am about to reply to
> someone who originally cross-posted, but I've not seen that for
> this particular thread, not originally, not the middle, and not
> where we are now.


I'm not Bob, but just FYI, XNews is apparently not warning you. This thread,
and your reply is cross-posted to

microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,
and microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support

I don't have all problem with such cross-posting, by the way. As far as I'm
concerned, cross-posting to a few related groups is fine. Cross-posting
mostly got its bad reputation because it's the traditional tool of the
spammer, but the kind of crossposting in this thread clearly isn't spam.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

Gary S. Terhune added these comments in the current discussion
du jour ...

> Your post (the one I'm repaying to) is cross-posted to
> windwosxp.basics, windowsxp.general and
> windowsxp.help_and_support.
>
> (Note, I have no problem with your X-posting, just thought I'd
> let you know.)
>

Again, /I/ am NOT cross-posting, so if my posts are showing up
multiple places it can only mean I am replying to someone who did.
I know how to cross-post, when it should be done and when it should
not be done. Almost exclusively, I do NOT do that. If I am not
replying to a cross-poster, which would automagically propogate my
reply as well, then I don't know what is going on.

--
HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

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

> The thread was originally crossposted to and is currently
> crossposting to:
>
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
> microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support


This is what I thought, thanks for the confirmation. Usually, Xnews
warns me about this, but it hasn't for this thread.
>
> and FWIW I don't think anyone is particularly concerned about
> your postings in this thread.


Yes, thank you again. I believe it is only 2 people who are
annoyed, but since there may have been lurkers annoyed I didn't
know about, I thought it polite and professional to apologize even
though I didn't think I was doing anything all that bad.

> have a good one!


And, you have a great day, too, Bob!

--
HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

But you ARE replying to a cross-posted message, which automatically makes
your reply cross-posted as well. I can't tell you what's wrong with your
newsreader, but your posts are definitely cross-posted, as are all of the
posts in this thread.

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

"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns999397F066378ReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Gary S. Terhune added these comments in the current discussion
> du jour ...
>
>> Your post (the one I'm repaying to) is cross-posted to
>> windwosxp.basics, windowsxp.general and
>> windowsxp.help_and_support.
>>
>> (Note, I have no problem with your X-posting, just thought I'd
>> let you know.)
>>

> Again, /I/ am NOT cross-posting, so if my posts are showing up
> multiple places it can only mean I am replying to someone who did.
> I know how to cross-post, when it should be done and when it should
> not be done. Almost exclusively, I do NOT do that. If I am not
> replying to a cross-poster, which would automagically propogate my
> reply as well, then I don't know what is going on.
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

Gary S. Terhune added these comments in the current discussion
du jour ...

> But you ARE replying to a cross-posted message, which
> automatically makes your reply cross-posted as well. I can't
> tell you what's wrong with your newsreader, but your posts are
> definitely cross-posted, as are all of the posts in this
> thread.


Well, since Xnews isn't warning me - this time - then I either
cross-post my replies or don't post at all. But, since the number
is rather small and the major objectors even smaller, 1, 2, maybe
3, so what? I just heard from Ken Blake, an MVP, who doesn't seem
to have any problem with the small-scale cross-posting that goes on
here and serveral other people have told me that they're not
particularly annoyed, so why doesn't everybody just let it drop.

Better still, why not whack on the OP for doing it, and leave the
people either trying to help or evolving the thread into other
useful directions alone? In other words, live and let live.

--
HP, aka Jerry
 
Re: XP SP3 Details?

I certainly agree. Just wanted to make your own technical X-post issue
clear, at least from this viewpoint, <s>.

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

"HEMI-Powered" <none@none.sn> wrote in message
news:Xns99939DF6B7ADAReplyScoreID@216.168.3.30...
> Gary S. Terhune added these comments in the current discussion
> du jour ...
>
>> But you ARE replying to a cross-posted message, which
>> automatically makes your reply cross-posted as well. I can't
>> tell you what's wrong with your newsreader, but your posts are
>> definitely cross-posted, as are all of the posts in this
>> thread.

>
> Well, since Xnews isn't warning me - this time - then I either
> cross-post my replies or don't post at all. But, since the number
> is rather small and the major objectors even smaller, 1, 2, maybe
> 3, so what? I just heard from Ken Blake, an MVP, who doesn't seem
> to have any problem with the small-scale cross-posting that goes on
> here and serveral other people have told me that they're not
> particularly annoyed, so why doesn't everybody just let it drop.
>
> Better still, why not whack on the OP for doing it, and leave the
> people either trying to help or evolving the thread into other
> useful directions alone? In other words, live and let live.
>
> --
> HP, aka Jerry
 
Back
Top