If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
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 ... Why don't you post to ten more NGs? - PLONK "HEMI-Powered" wrote in message ... 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 |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
XP SP3 Details?
Are you such a perfectionist that you have to complain about friendly
posts???? "Gerry" wrote in message ... 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. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
XP SP3 Details?
there is no rule against
cross posting, Hemi. http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales...elp_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" wrote in message ... Doug W. added these comments in the current discussion du jour ... Why don't you post to ten more NGs? - PLONK "HEMI-Powered" wrote in message ... 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 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
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" wrote in message ... 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 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
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...elp_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 |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
XP SP3 Details?
Didn't it come with MS-DOS???
"Bob I" wrote in message ... 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 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
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 ****ed-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 |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
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" wrote in message ... 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 ****ed-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 |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
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 ****ed-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! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|