no answer for first question

[harinder]

why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
some software in winxp

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"harinder" > wrote in message
...
> why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> some software in winxp

Because certain files may be updated that are currently in use by the
operating system and thus can only be swapped out for the new ones on a
reboot.
--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"harinder" > wrote in message
...
> why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> some software in winxp

[Jim Macklin]

Better code, different system, previous versions of Windows
are based on old DOS code, XP is based on NT (New
Technology) so some things are different.

It depends on what the software author requires with which
OS. I still think a reboot isn't a bad idea. With XP or
any other OS, a reboot is like washing the blackboard of all
the chalk dust.


"harinder" > wrote in message
...
| why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
| some software in winxp

[Kelly]

Hi Mike,

Great to see you here. Hope all is well. :o)

--
All the Best,
Kelly

MS-MVP Win98/XP
[AE-Windows® XP]

Troubleshooting Windows XP
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com

Top 10 Frequently Asked Questions and Answers
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/top10faqs.htm


"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> "harinder" > wrote in message
> ...
> > why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> > some software in winxp
>
> Because certain files may be updated that are currently in use by the
> operating system and thus can only be swapped out for the new ones on a
> reboot.
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups
>
> "harinder" > wrote in message
> ...
> > why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> > some software in winxp
>
>

[Chek]

Jim,
NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed the NT
kernel.
Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
tautologous.
I can well believe SB trying to rewrite history, but please, let's not do it
for him eh?
Chek

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
...
> Better code, different system, previous versions of Windows
> are based on old DOS code, XP is based on NT (New
> Technology) so some things are different.
>
> It depends on what the software author requires with which
> OS. I still think a reboot isn't a bad idea. With XP or
> any other OS, a reboot is like washing the blackboard of all
> the chalk dust.
>
>
> "harinder" > wrote in message
> ...
> | why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> | some software in winxp
>
>

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

"Chek" > wrote in message
...
> Jim,
> NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed the
NT
> kernel.
> Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> tautologous.

Chek,

Northern Telecom of Canada had nothing to do with the Microsoft Windows NT
kernel.
This was developed by one of our teams lead by Dave Cutler.

(and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
marketing)

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Chek" > wrote in message
...
> Jim,
> NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed the
NT
> kernel.
> Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> tautologous.
> I can well believe SB trying to rewrite history, but please, let's not do
it
> for him eh?
> Chek
>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Better code, different system, previous versions of Windows
> > are based on old DOS code, XP is based on NT (New
> > Technology) so some things are different.
> >
> > It depends on what the software author requires with which
> > OS. I still think a reboot isn't a bad idea. With XP or
> > any other OS, a reboot is like washing the blackboard of all
> > the chalk dust.
> >
> >
> > "harinder" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > | why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> > | some software in winxp
> >
> >
>
>

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
>
> (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
> marketing)

Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology", therefore NT
Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!


--
Google is your Friend
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam:
gordonATgbpcomputingDOTcoDOTuk
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Chek]

Mike,
As I understood it, David Cutler was working for Digital developing the OS
that became NT (for Northern Telecom) prior to going to Microsoft in the
late 80's
Microsoft did not release their NT OS until 92 or 93.
It's a story I remember from my training days (analogous to Xerox's GUI
being refined by MS into Windows).
It seems plausible in the way that the telecoms industry was the driving
force behind most digital switching development in pre mass computer times.
So is the story completely wrong, or is there an element of substance there?
Not that it really matters, but it does appeal to my liking for little
known facts.
Chek



"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> "Chek" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Jim,
> > NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed
the
> NT
> > kernel.
> > Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> > tautologous.
>
> Chek,
>
> Northern Telecom of Canada had nothing to do with the Microsoft Windows NT
> kernel.
> This was developed by one of our teams lead by Dave Cutler.
>
> (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
> marketing)
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups
>
> "Chek" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Jim,
> > NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed
the
> NT
> > kernel.
> > Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> > tautologous.
> > I can well believe SB trying to rewrite history, but please, let's not
do
> it
> > for him eh?
> > Chek
> >
> > "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Better code, different system, previous versions of Windows
> > > are based on old DOS code, XP is based on NT (New
> > > Technology) so some things are different.
> > >
> > > It depends on what the software author requires with which
> > > OS. I still think a reboot isn't a bad idea. With XP or
> > > any other OS, a reboot is like washing the blackboard of all
> > > the chalk dust.
> > >
> > >
> > > "harinder" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > | why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> > > | some software in winxp
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[SunSpot]

"Gordon Burgess-Parker" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
> >
> > (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
> > marketing)
>
> Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology", therefore NT
> Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!
>

OK, now my head hurts. ;-)

>
> --
> Google is your Friend
> Email address deliberately false to avoid spam:
> gordonATgbpcomputingDOTcoDOTuk
> www.gbpcomputing.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

Chek,

Dave Cutler joined Microsoft in October 1988 to lead the team that took 4
years to develop Microsoft Windows NT.
Prior to that he was with Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) where he first
built a real time system called RSX-11M for the PDP-11 16-bit systems. He
then went on to lead the team for the VAX-11 architecture OS that was to
become know as VMS. After VMS Dave went on to work on developing compliers
and then led the group that built Digitals first MicroVAX workstation the
MicroVAX 1. Finally meeting up with Bill in the Summer of 1988 and joining
later that year.

The NT moniker has nothing to do with Northern Telecom, the most popular
story apart from "New Technology" Hence Windows NT, is the one around the
naming of HAL in the book 2001:A Space Odyssey.
If you are unaware of it, it goes something like :-
Take IBM and go down one letter of the alphabet to get HAL
Take VMS and go UP one letter yields WNT (Windows NT)
Which is of course almost certainly untrue - but a nice story :-)

--
Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Chek" > wrote in message
...
> Mike,
> As I understood it, David Cutler was working for Digital developing the OS
> that became NT (for Northern Telecom) prior to going to Microsoft in the
> late 80's
> Microsoft did not release their NT OS until 92 or 93.
> It's a story I remember from my training days (analogous to Xerox's GUI
> being refined by MS into Windows).
> It seems plausible in the way that the telecoms industry was the driving
> force behind most digital switching development in pre mass computer
times.
> So is the story completely wrong, or is there an element of substance
there?
> Not that it really matters, but it does appeal to my liking for little
> known facts.
> Chek
>
>
>
> "Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Chek" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Jim,
> > > NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed
> the
> > NT
> > > kernel.
> > > Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> > > tautologous.
> >
> > Chek,
> >
> > Northern Telecom of Canada had nothing to do with the Microsoft Windows
NT
> > kernel.
> > This was developed by one of our teams lead by Dave Cutler.
> >
> > (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
> > marketing)
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike
> > --
> > Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
> >
> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > rights
> >
> > Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> > newsgroups
> >
> > "Chek" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Jim,
> > > NT is a reminder that it was Canada's Northern Telecom that developed
> the
> > NT
> > > kernel.
> > > Otherwise the MS slogan 'based on NT technology' would be extremely
> > > tautologous.
> > > I can well believe SB trying to rewrite history, but please, let's not
> do
> > it
> > > for him eh?
> > > Chek
> > >
> > > "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Better code, different system, previous versions of Windows
> > > > are based on old DOS code, XP is based on NT (New
> > > > Technology) so some things are different.
> > > >
> > > > It depends on what the software author requires with which
> > > > OS. I still think a reboot isn't a bad idea. With XP or
> > > > any other OS, a reboot is like washing the blackboard of all
> > > > the chalk dust.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "harinder" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > | why is it not necessary to reboot system after installing
> > > > | some software in winxp
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Chek]

"Mike Brannigan [MSFT]" > wrote in message
...
> Chek,
>
> Dave Cutler joined Microsoft in October 1988 to lead the team that took 4
> years to develop Microsoft Windows NT.
> Prior to that he was with Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) where he
first
> built a real time system called RSX-11M for the PDP-11 16-bit systems. He
> then went on to lead the team for the VAX-11 architecture OS that was to
> become know as VMS. After VMS Dave went on to work on developing compliers
> and then led the group that built Digitals first MicroVAX workstation the
> MicroVAX 1. Finally meeting up with Bill in the Summer of 1988 and joining
> later that year.
>
> The NT moniker has nothing to do with Northern Telecom, the most popular
> story apart from "New Technology" Hence Windows NT, is the one around the
> naming of HAL in the book 2001:A Space Odyssey.
> If you are unaware of it, it goes something like :-
> Take IBM and go down one letter of the alphabet to get HAL
> Take VMS and go UP one letter yields WNT (Windows NT)
> Which is of course almost certainly untrue - but a nice story :-)
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Mike
> --
> Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights
>
> Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
> newsgroups
>
Mike,
OK, I'll buy that - thanks for the impromptu history lesson :)
All the best,
Chek

[Patrick]

Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
> Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
>>
>> (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
>> marketing)
>
> Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology", therefore NT
> Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!

Really nearly, nearly really means (really), really nearly.
Meaning ... eh, something to do with really, nearly or NT-(n)ologys.
:) (my brain hurts) :)

[Ken Blake]

In ,
Gordon Burgess-Parker > typed:

> Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
>>
>> (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was
approved by
>> marketing)
>
> Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology",
therefore NT
> Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!



Although "NT" originally stood for "New Technology," Microsoft
currrently say that it stands for nothing. So, from their
perspective, it's not really redundant.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

[Gordon Burgess-Parker]

Ken Blake wrote:
> In ,
> Gordon Burgess-Parker > typed:
>
>> Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
>>>
>>> (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
>>> marketing)
>>
>> Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology", therefore NT
>> Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!
>
>
>
> Although "NT" originally stood for "New Technology," Microsoft
> currrently say that it stands for nothing. So, from their
> perspective, it's not really redundant.

So it's "No Technology"! :-)

--
Google is your Friend
Email address deliberately false to avoid spam:
gordonATgbpcomputingDOTcoDOTuk
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Hermes]

Ken Blake, while listening to the voices in their head blather on
endlessly about inspecific gibberish, typed:
|| In ,
|| Gordon Burgess-Parker > typed:
||
||| Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
||||
|||| (and yes the "built on NT technology" seems odd but was approved by
|||| marketing)
|||
||| Particularly as NT itself stands for "New Technology", therefore NT
||| Technology REALLY means - New Technology Technology!
||
||
||
|| Although "NT" originally stood for "New Technology," Microsoft
|| currrently say that it stands for nothing. So, from their
|| perspective, it's not really redundant.
||
|| --
|| Ken Blake
|| Please reply to the newsgroup

ROFL! So Windows NT is Windows N(oth)T(ing) and Windows 2000 and Windows XP
are based on Nothing?