XP slowdown

Bent Attorney

I agree with the comments made by my preference for replacements for Norton
would be AVG 8 and Spybot S & D both of which have freeware versions
available for home users.

You should endeavour to eliminate recurring Errors and Warnings in the Event
Viewer System and Application logs. Have there been any further errors from
Event Source: Disk since this one?

Event Type: Error
Event Source: Disk
Event Category: None
Event ID: 7
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 1:13:33 AM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The device, \Device\Harddisk0\D, has a bad block.

Try HD Tune. It only gives information and does not fix any
problems.

Download and run it and see what it turns up. You want HD Tune
(freeware) version 2.55 not HD Tune Pro (not Freeware) version 3.00.
http://www.hdtune.com/

Select the Info tabs and place the cursor on the drive under Drive
letter and then double click the two page icon ( copy to Clipboard )
and copy into a further message.

Select the Health tab and then double click the two page icon ( copy to
Clipboard ) and copy into a further message. Make sure you do a full
surface scan with HD Tune.

--


Hope this helps.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 4:37 pm, "Gerry" wrote:
Bent Attorney

Try Ctrl+Alt+Delete to select Task Manager and click the Performance
Tab. Under Commit Charge what is the Total, the Limit and the Peak?

Commit Charge (K):
Total: 605412
Limit: 1033300
Peak: 887068


Have a look in the System and Application logs in Event Viewer for
Errors and Warnings and post copies here. Don't post any more than 48
hours ago.

Event Type: Error
Event Source: Automatic LiveUpdate Scheduler
Event Category: Scheduler Events
Event ID: 101
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 3:15:54 PM
User: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
Information Level: error
Initialization of the COM subsystem failed. Error code: 0x8007041D

Event Type: Warning
Event Source: SQLBrowser
Event Category: None
Event ID: 3
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 3:04:14 PM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The configuration of the AdminConnection\TCP protocol in the SQL
instance SQLEXPRESS is not valid.

I've got many many (hundreds of errors) on the System page. Here's
the most recent one:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: Disk
Event Category: None
Event ID: 7
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 1:13:33 AM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The device, \Device\Harddisk0\D, has a bad block.

The errors seem to be similar.

For more information, see Help and Support Center at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
For more information, see Help and Support Center at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

You can access Event Viewer by selecting Start, Control Panel,
Administrative Tools, and Event Viewer. When researching the meaning
of the error, information regarding Event ID, Source and Description
are important.

HOW TO: View and Manage Event Logs in Event Viewer in Windows
XPhttp://support.microsoft.com/kb/308427/en-us

A tip for posting copies of Error Reports! Run Event Viewer and double
click on the error you want to copy. In the window, which appears is a
button resembling two pages. Click the button and close Event
Viewer.Now start your message (email) and do a paste into the body of
the message. Make sure this is the first paste after exiting from
Event Viewer.

--

Hope this helps.


Yes. I think I have some research to do.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in
...
On Mar 3, 9:39 am, "Falcon" wrote:

Dandroid wrote:
After disinfecting for spyware/malware, and restoring to even the
earliest
restore point, my dell still boots and runs very slow. I may have
quarantined or otherwise erased important xp files during the
disinfection
process. Knowledgable friends say format & reinstall. I can but would
rather not. Does a method exist for repair without reformatting?

Yes,
see:http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/u.../learnmore/tip...

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

I've the same problem. My computer has become terribly slow. When I
start up, it takes 20 - 25 minutes before I can get on the internet.
I only have 256 meg. memory, but I don't think it should run this slow
because of memory. It's funny, but my major slowdown occurred about 2
years ago, when I wasn't on the internet.
I may upgrade to more memory later on.

Bent Attorney

I agree with the comments made by my preference for replacements for Norton
would be AVG 8 and Spybot S & D both of which have freeware versions
available for home users.

You should endeavour to eliminate recurring Errors and Warnings in the Event
Viewer System and Application logs. Have there been any further errors from
Event Source: Disk since this one?

Event Type: Error
Event Source: Disk
Event Category: None
Event ID: 7
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 1:13:33 AM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The device, \Device\Harddisk0\D, has a bad block.

Try HD Tune. It only gives information and does not fix any
problems.

Download and run it and see what it turns up. You want HD Tune
(freeware) version 2.55 not HD Tune Pro (not Freeware) version 3.00.
http://www.hdtune.com/

Select the Info tabs and place the cursor on the drive under Drive
letter and then double click the two page icon ( copy to Clipboard )
and copy into a further message.

Select the Health tab and then double click the two page icon ( copy to
Clipboard ) and copy into a further message. Make sure you do a full
surface scan with HD Tune.

--


Hope this helps.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 4:37 pm, "Gerry" wrote:
Bent Attorney

Try Ctrl+Alt+Delete to select Task Manager and click the Performance
Tab. Under Commit Charge what is the Total, the Limit and the Peak?

Commit Charge (K):
Total: 605412
Limit: 1033300
Peak: 887068


Have a look in the System and Application logs in Event Viewer for
Errors and Warnings and post copies here. Don't post any more than 48
hours ago.

Event Type: Error
Event Source: Automatic LiveUpdate Scheduler
Event Category: Scheduler Events
Event ID: 101
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 3:15:54 PM
User: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
Information Level: error
Initialization of the COM subsystem failed. Error code: 0x8007041D

Event Type: Warning
Event Source: SQLBrowser
Event Category: None
Event ID: 3
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 3:04:14 PM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The configuration of the AdminConnection\TCP protocol in the SQL
instance SQLEXPRESS is not valid.

I've got many many (hundreds of errors) on the System page. Here's
the most recent one:
Event Type: Error
Event Source: Disk
Event Category: None
Event ID: 7
Date: 3/3/2009
Time: 1:13:33 AM
User: N/A
Computer: HH-53CHNAJ0OE6O
Description:
The device, \Device\Harddisk0\D, has a bad block.

The errors seem to be similar.

For more information, see Help and Support Center at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.
For more information, see Help and Support Center at
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp.

You can access Event Viewer by selecting Start, Control Panel,
Administrative Tools, and Event Viewer. When researching the meaning
of the error, information regarding Event ID, Source and Description
are important.

HOW TO: View and Manage Event Logs in Event Viewer in Windows
XPhttp://support.microsoft.com/kb/308427/en-us

A tip for posting copies of Error Reports! Run Event Viewer and double
click on the error you want to copy. In the window, which appears is a
button resembling two pages. Click the button and close Event
Viewer.Now start your message (email) and do a paste into the body of
the message. Make sure this is the first paste after exiting from
Event Viewer.

--

Hope this helps.


Yes. I think I have some research to do.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in
...
On Mar 3, 9:39 am, "Falcon" wrote:

Dandroid wrote:
After disinfecting for spyware/malware, and restoring to even the
earliest
restore point, my dell still boots and runs very slow. I may have
quarantined or otherwise erased important xp files during the
disinfection
process. Knowledgable friends say format & reinstall. I can but would
rather not. Does a method exist for repair without reformatting?

Yes,
see:http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/u.../learnmore/tip...

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)

I've the same problem. My computer has become terribly slow. When I
start up, it takes 20 - 25 minutes before I can get on the internet.
I only have 256 meg. memory, but I don't think it should run this slow
because of memory. It's funny, but my major slowdown occurred about 2
years ago, when I wasn't on the internet.
I may upgrade to more memory later on.

snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?


You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
.... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk: "1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?


You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
.... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk: "1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

On Mar 9, 6:23*am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. *To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. *You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize....
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

On Mar 9, 6:23*am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. *To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. *You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize....
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

You are in a newsgroup, not a court of law. In a newsgroup there are
customs and conventions that have been established over the years. Legal
definitions don't matter.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Bent Attorney Esq. wrote:
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)
OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...
What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?
You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

You are in a newsgroup, not a court of law. In a newsgroup there are
customs and conventions that have been established over the years. Legal
definitions don't matter.
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Bent Attorney Esq. wrote:
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)
OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...
What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?
You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

Bent

This dialogue about hijacking has got out of hand. The reason for starting a
new thread is to avoid confusion as, although users frequently think they
have the same problem, it is often not the case. Starting a new thread makes
for clarity helping those to understand the problem and the answers to
questions posed. If you just said sorry for the misunderstand the other
normally helpful individuals would stop pursuing the point.

Otherwise you have not responding to my questions about your problem.


--


Hope this helps.

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


"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at
gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

Bent

This dialogue about hijacking has got out of hand. The reason for starting a
new thread is to avoid confusion as, although users frequently think they
have the same problem, it is often not the case. Starting a new thread makes
for clarity helping those to understand the problem and the answers to
questions posed. If you just said sorry for the misunderstand the other
normally helpful individuals would stop pursuing the point.

Otherwise you have not responding to my questions about your problem.


--


Hope this helps.

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


"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. You are clearly visible and out in the open. My glasses
have seen to that. Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at
gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

On Mar 9, 11:47*am, "Gerry" wrote:
Bent

This dialogue about hijacking has got out of hand. The reason for starting a
new thread is to avoid confusion as, although users frequently think they
have the same problem, it is often not the case. Starting a new thread makes
for clarity helping those to understand the problem and the answers to
questions posed. If you just said sorry for the misunderstand the other
normally helpful individuals would stop pursuing the point.


I said I made an error a few posts ago. That's all you're getting out
of me. Now you are getting on the hijacking bandwagon as well. Guess
what Gerry: You've got nothing to teach me. I've learned much on my
own in the past couple of days. Beats posting to the deadbeat
(including you)pseudo helpers here. In case you didn't get the gist
of this post it is this: flip you and the horse you rode in on.

Otherwise you have not responding to my questions about your problem.

--

Hope *this helps.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in ...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:



snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."

Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""

You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. *Intent must
be involved. *If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. *I responded positively to this thread. *There was no
hijacking. *Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. *Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' *It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. *You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. *You are clearly visible and out in the open. *My glasses
have seen to that. *Next: *You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. *I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at
gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

On Mar 9, 11:47*am, "Gerry" wrote:
Bent

This dialogue about hijacking has got out of hand. The reason for starting a
new thread is to avoid confusion as, although users frequently think they
have the same problem, it is often not the case. Starting a new thread makes
for clarity helping those to understand the problem and the answers to
questions posed. If you just said sorry for the misunderstand the other
normally helpful individuals would stop pursuing the point.


I said I made an error a few posts ago. That's all you're getting out
of me. Now you are getting on the hijacking bandwagon as well. Guess
what Gerry: You've got nothing to teach me. I've learned much on my
own in the past couple of days. Beats posting to the deadbeat
(including you)pseudo helpers here. In case you didn't get the gist
of this post it is this: flip you and the horse you rode in on.

Otherwise you have not responding to my questions about your problem.

--

Hope *this helps.

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

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in ...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:



snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."

Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""

You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything. *Intent must
be involved. *If you go by your new and improved version of the word,
then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand) that accused me of hijacking
this thread(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. *I responded positively to this thread. *There was no
hijacking. *Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.
So we have here a thread that has morphed from concerning itself with
'XP Slowdown' to a thread that has been hijacked by the imbeciles who
live among us; hijacked into a thread that is concerned with hijacking
a thread. *Please note that I wear special sunglasses; much in the
same way that Roddy Piper wore in the movie 'They Live.' *It lets me
see who the green lizard people are very clearly. *You obviously
intended to disrupt this thread and have of course succeeded by
hijackery. *You are clearly visible and out in the open. *My glasses
have seen to that. *Next: *You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. *I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack, meaning (b): "to
commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at
gunpoint"

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hijack, meaning (3): "to seize...
by force or threat of force"

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/hijack?view=uk:"1 illegally seize
control of (an aircraft, ship, etc.) while it is in transit. 2 take over
(something) and use it for a different purpose.

Someone can be wrong; fine. But when they aren't, and someone (you, here)
tries to correct them but are themselves wrong (and furthermore isn't
familiar with well-understood "local jargon"), I have to wade in!

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything.

I wasn't trying to but didn't need to - you interjected with "I've the same
problem...." and that's called thread hijacking here, whether you like it or
agree with it or not.

Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,

Not mine - online dictionaries agreed.

then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand)

What a charmer you are.


that accused me of hijacking
this thread

No, I didn't - I accused you of nothing but using a wrong definition of a
word. And now, of arrogance.


(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.

You're really trying to make people like you and want to help you, aren't
you?


snip absolute woffle

Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

Wait away, I've wasted enough time on you. If that's "scurrying away" in
your book, so be it. (Moreover, I stopped counting at six errors.)

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, "Olórin"
wrote:
snip

(BAE, in the future, please start your *own* thread. Thank you.)

OK. I didn't realize I was breaching etiquette. Subject line
related to my problem so...

What do you think "hijacking someone else's thread" means?

You of course are using the word 'hijacking' incorrectly. To hijack
something means that there was intent to steal something; i.e. an
aircraft comes to mind. You can't innocently hijack something without
without there being the intention of theft.
snip
==========

Nope. It *can* mean that but doesn't have to. For instance:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hijack, meaning (c): "To seize control of
... by use of force, especially in order to reach an alternate
destination."


Theft.

http://www.alphadictionary.com/goodword/word/hijack, meaning (2): "To
illegally take control of a transport vessel or vehicle and divert it to a
different destination." The site also notes: "The meaning of today's word
has been changing recently... it also applies to a wide assortment of
metaphors, "The conversation was pleasantly random until Stu deBaker and
Ford Parker came in and hijacked it; after that, the only topic discussed
was cars.""


You have not proven that I intended to hijack anything.

I wasn't trying to but didn't need to - you interjected with "I've the same
problem...." and that's called thread hijacking here, whether you like it or
agree with it or not.

Intent must
be involved. If you go by your new and improved version of the word,

Not mine - online dictionaries agreed.

then you must understand that the idiots(that includes you btw, just
in case you're too dense to understand)

What a charmer you are.


that accused me of hijacking
this thread

No, I didn't - I accused you of nothing but using a wrong definition of a
word. And now, of arrogance.


(which btw I never did; look at the subject of the thread;
what does it say?)did in fact hijack this thread; the subject was 'XP
Slowdown'. I responded positively to this thread. There was no
hijacking. Then the anal crowd came in, listened to themselves roar
and scurried away like the mice they are.

You're really trying to make people like you and want to help you, aren't
you?


snip absolute woffle

Next: You're going to bring up grammar and
spehlink. I purposely made 5 basic errors; let's see if you can find
them.
I'm waiting.

Wait away, I've wasted enough time on you. If that's "scurrying away" in
your book, so be it. (Moreover, I stopped counting at six errors.)

"Bent Attorney Esq." wrote in message
...

snip

I said I made an error a few posts ago. That's all you're getting out
of me. Now you are getting on the hijacking bandwagon as well. Guess
what Gerry: You've got nothing to teach me. I've learned much on my
own in the past couple of days. Beats posting to the deadbeat
(including you)pseudo helpers here. In case you didn't get the gist
of this post it is this: flip you and the horse you rode in on.

I would like to wish you good luck sorting out your problem on your own
now - but I'm not going to. I hope you flounder to the full degree you
deserve for being such an appallingly rude ****.

I'm working from a new PC; I didn't bother trying to import my killfile
entries from my last one, but you're now the first there.

*plonk*