OT: Windows 2000 Pro to XP Pro upgrade without having to reinstall applications?

[MM]

If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.

It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
collating all the installation disks.

By the way I will make a TrueImage backup image of the entire disk
before starting the upgrade process.

Thanks for any tips in this regard.

MM

[Geoff Pearson]

"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:idojr8hrgha5auoah...@4ax.com...

I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that is
daft).

[Scion]

MM put finger to keyboard:

Most apps will be fine. Device drivers are the most likely things to need
reinstallation. If you've got an image then what's the worst that can
happen?

Oh, and welcome to the 21st century :-)

[Martin Brown]

On 13/06/2013 16:19, MM wrote:
> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
> printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
> typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
> of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.

You will be lucky if any of them work without a reinstall and you would
be much wiser to start with a clean slate anyway. The registry tends to
end up insanely cluttered on an old machine. Some drivers are bound not
to exist for old hardware on newer OSs HP are a nuisance for this.

> It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
> When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
> reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
> collating all the installation disks.

Installing a newer OS over another as an "upgrade" tends to produce a
hopelessly unstable hybrid even when it is *supposed* to work.
Installing an already borderline geriatric OS is a bit crazy anyway.

Clean sweep and start afresh is always the best way to proceed when
changing OS. Or you could use a partition manager on a single disk.

>
> By the way I will make a TrueImage backup image of the entire disk
> before starting the upgrade process.
>
> Thanks for any tips in this regard.
>
> MM

Hard disks are cheap! Install another disk instead and then you have the
option of booting from either of them during the transition.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[MM]

Can't afford Windows 7 twice. Just paid £170 last week for one bona
fide Win 7 Ultimate from MS. Anyway, XP is all I need for everyday
word processing, and VB6 can be a bit "iffy"under Win7.

MM

[MM]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 15:23:32 +0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

I only believe in upgrading when it's absolutely necessary, and now
even I have to admit that W2K is old old old. Not much of the latest
software runs on it, either at all or only flakily. But I use XP SP3
all the time for everyday use and it's absolutely fine.

Sure, an image can be a lifesaver, and the worst that can happen is
that I have to wipe the drive and start with a clean install of XP,
but as I said, reinstalling all the apps takes ruddy forever, as I did
it once already when "upgrading" from Win 98. Not only have I got over
a hundred ActiveX controls in WinNT\System2, a number of them have
been upgraded since first installation, so getting the drive back to
how it was but with XP, going down that route would be a friggin'
nightmare.

Anyway, as you say, I've got nothing to lose, and TrueImage is ruddy
brilliant. You can actually mount an image (even if spread across 11
TIB files as my backup is) and read or copy any individual file from
anywhere within the 70GB drive content.

MM

[Peter Percival]

MM wrote:
> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,

Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
I'd like to know where it can be bought from.

> printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
> typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
> of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.

--
I think I am an Elephant,
Behind another Elephant
Behind /another/ Elephant who isn't really there....
A.A. Milne

[MM]

Food for thought...

I too would RATHER install clean from scratch, but I break out in a
cold sweat when I review my Programs folder and see what lies ahead to
reinstall everything.

Anyway, first things first, the backup, which is now progressing (11
DVDs, but also on a 1TB external USB hard drive for extra POM).

MM

[Java Jive]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:43:04 +0100, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On 13/06/2013 16:19, MM wrote:
> > If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
> > printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
> > typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
> > of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.

I successfully did this with my standard W2k build which is used
across all my PCs, and the result is being used to type this now.

There are some caveats, see below.

> You will be lucky if any of them work without a reinstall

This is bollocks. XP and 2k are the same major version number. 90-99%
of everything will work fine.

> and you would
> be much wiser to start with a clean slate anyway. The registry tends to
> end up insanely cluttered on an old machine. Some drivers are bound not
> to exist for old hardware on newer OSs HP are a nuisance for this.

But if they exist for 2k, by definition they exist for XP, unless they
fall into a very small number of devices such as cameras and scanners.
See below.

> > It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
> > When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
> > reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
> > collating all the installation disks.
>
> Installing a newer OS over another as an "upgrade" tends to produce a
> hopelessly unstable hybrid even when it is *supposed* to work.
> Installing an already borderline geriatric OS is a bit crazy anyway.

Again bollocks. XP and 2k being the same major version number, it's
more likely to work with these two versions of Windows than almost any
other that you could think of.

> Clean sweep and start afresh is always the best way to proceed when
> changing OS. Or you could use a partition manager on a single disk.

It depends on a lot of things. If, like myself and apparently the OP,
if you have a great deal of software on a build, it can make perfect
sense to upgrade rather than re-install.

> > By the way I will make a TrueImage backup image of the entire disk
> > before starting the upgrade process.

See below.

> Hard disks are cheap! Install another disk instead and then you have the
> option of booting from either of them during the transition.

Well, they're not as cheap relative to everything else as they were a
couple of years ago, but whatever. I think I've made my point.

To the OP:

As you seem to have worked out, image the disk first, and preferably
try to make sure the image can be reinstalled successfully. Then, if
it all goes pear-shaped, you can simply re-image and try again. It
might take several attempts to get it right.

You are most likely to have problems ...

- If you've applied security templates to the W2k build. You'll
have to remove all the special security settings first, and applying
the SetUp template won't be enough to do this, because it only sets up
basic settings, not undoes previous settings. Until I did this, I
couldn't get the upgrade to 'take' without problems in the result -
particularly it's one of the causes of a well-known phenomenon of the
Network Connections folder in Control Panel being empty, which is
well-documented online, but no-one seemed to have an answer that fixed
my problem, but I eventually worked out for myself that it was
something to do with security, and undid all my 'improvements', and
then it worked.

- If you have camera, scanner, phone, and possibly printer software
installed. The first three, particularly, you will probably have to
reinstall. This is because the image acquisition system is different
under XP. This is why some phones, such as my own Samsung Galaxy Note
II, are not supported under W2k but are under XP.

- If you have certain software starting from boot. For example,
uninstall any firewall and anti-virus software before attempting the
upgrade, and then reinstall the latter afterwards, remembering that XP
is the first version of Windows to have its own firewall.

- Before attempting the upgrade, download SysInternals' rootkit
checker and run a check, and run a complete AV scan.

Whether you do a complete reinstall, or upgrade, probably it's going
to be more work than you think, but an upgrade should be perfectly
possible.

HTHs
--
=========================================================
Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's
header does not exist. Or use a contact address at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

[MM]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 17:25:11 +0100, Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

Thanks for this, JJ.

MM

[Adrian]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 17:00:29 +0100, MM wrote:

> I too would RATHER install clean from scratch, but I break out in a cold
> sweat when I review my Programs folder and see what lies ahead to
> reinstall everything.

TBH, do you actually NEED half of it? There's a lot of stuff gets
installed because "it's always been there".

Oh, and www.ninite.com - dead easy automated installer for a lot of the
"generic stuff", without the toolbars/adware/bloatyjunk.

I'm also in the "scary amounts of cruft - fresh reinstall!" camp on this.
One OS upgrade is just about doable. Upgrading a machine that's already
been upgraded... <ewww!>

[MM]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:57:59 +0100, Peter Percival
<peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>MM wrote:
>> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
>
>Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
>I'd like to know where it can be bought from.

Amazon has several different versions, from around £100.

MM

[Mr Pounder]

"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:idojr8hrgha5auoah...@4ax.com...

Ask here
alt.os.windows-xp

[postmaster @ stejonda]

In message <b1u6bf...@mid.individual.net>, Geoff Pearson
<gspear...@hotmail.com> writes

>
>"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:idojr8hrgha5auoah...@4ax.com...

>> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro,
>

>I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
>everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that
>is daft).

Why daft?

--
Simon

12) The Second Rule of Expectations
An EXPECTATION is a Premeditated resentment.

[MM]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:04:48 +0100, "postmaster @ stejonda"
<usenet...@stejonda.org.uk> wrote:

>In message <b1u6bf...@mid.individual.net>, Geoff Pearson
><gspear...@hotmail.com> writes
>>
>>"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:idojr8hrgha5auoah...@4ax.com...
>
>>> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro,
>>
>>I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
>>everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that
>>is daft).
>
>Why daft?

I wouldn't touch Win8 with a bargepole from what *I've* seen of it.
Bloody awful PoS.

MM

[MM]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:38:52 +0000 (UTC), Adrian
<tooma...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 17:00:29 +0100, MM wrote:
>
>> I too would RATHER install clean from scratch, but I break out in a cold
>> sweat when I review my Programs folder and see what lies ahead to
>> reinstall everything.
>
>TBH, do you actually NEED half of it? There's a lot of stuff gets
>installed because "it's always been there".

That is very true, yes.

>
>Oh, and www.ninite.com - dead easy automated installer for a lot of the
>"generic stuff", without the toolbars/adware/bloatyjunk.
>
>I'm also in the "scary amounts of cruft - fresh reinstall!" camp on this.
>One OS upgrade is just about doable. Upgrading a machine that's already
>been upgraded... <ewww!>

I'm just completing copying the TIB files onto DVDs (11 DVDs), so it
won't be today now. Tomorrow, we'll see. If it all goes pear-shaped
with the upgrade, I can just reinstate the Win2K image. (I have never
known TrueImage to fail in the five years I've had it.) Even if
everything "appears" okay, but after several days' use it certainly is
not, then again, I can just either reinstate the original image or
bite the proverbial bullet and install from scratch.

MM

[John Rumm]

A couple of ways to mitigate this problem is either to install the new
OS so that you can dual boot and return to the old, or alternatively
capture the old platform as a virtual machine and then run it as a
client on the new host OS. So you have a new machine, and can start
migrating things as time permits, but also have the old one running in a
window when you need it.

> Anyway, first things first, the backup, which is now progressing (11
> DVDs, but also on a 1TB external USB hard drive for extra POM).

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[John Williamson]

MM wrote:
> I too would RATHER install clean from scratch, but I break out in a
> cold sweat when I review my Programs folder and see what lies ahead to
> reinstall everything.
>

The way I deal with this problem is to install Windows, then, as I find
a need for a program, I install it.

What I also do is, when I first install a program from its CD or DVD is
to make an image of the install media with a note of any necessary
validation codes in the same folder. Very few programs won't install
from an image, and it's a *lot* faster than using the original media. On
occasion, it can feel faster to rip an image and install from that than
to install from the original media.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[dennis@home]

On 13/06/2013 16:48, MM wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:21:37 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"

>> I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
>> everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that is
>> daft).
>
> Can't afford Windows 7 twice. Just paid £170 last week for one bona
> fide Win 7 Ultimate from MS. Anyway, XP is all I need for everyday
> word processing, and VB6 can be a bit "iffy"under Win7.

Win 8 is win 7 and is cheaper.

You can download the latest (or older) VB for free as long as you aren't
doing really difficult stuff.
http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/downloads#d-2012-express

[tony sayer]

In article <51ba4345$0$12281$c3e8da3$6901...@news.astraweb.com>,
dennis@home <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> scribeth thus

>On 13/06/2013 16:48, MM wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:21:37 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
>
>
>>> I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
>>> everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that is
>>> daft).
>>
>> Can't afford Windows 7 twice. Just paid £170 last week for one bona
>> fide Win 7 Ultimate from MS. Anyway, XP is all I need for everyday
>> word processing, and VB6 can be a bit "iffy"under Win7.
>
>Win 8 is win 7 and is cheaper.

And is a pile of cack..

>
>You can download the latest (or older) VB for free as long as you aren't
>doing really difficult stuff.
>http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/downloads#d-2012-express

--
Tony Sayer

[Tony Bryer]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:18:01 +0100 Mm wrote :
> I wouldn't touch Win8 with a bargepole from what *I've* seen of it.
> Bloody awful PoS.

A case of the lunatics taking over the asylum. I upgraded my laptop to
have a Win8 machine for testing and could not quite believe how bad it is.
One example: rather than include Acrobat Viewer they have written their
own. OK but if there's way to print the PDF you're looking at (just the
sort of thing you might want to do if someone sends you a PDF email
attachment) I can't find it. For all the jokes in the past as to why you
press the Start button to stop your computer, at least there was a pretty
obvious way of doing so. Not in Win8

And, yes, I know there are various third party offerings to 'fix' Win8 but
a good few users of my software will use it as it comes so I have to feel
their pain :)

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <AMlut.906$6y4...@newsfe12.iad>, Martin Brown <|||newspa
m|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> escribió:

>Installing a newer OS over another as an "upgrade" tends to produce a
>hopelessly unstable hybrid even when it is *supposed* to work.

That's not my experience. 2k to XP usually works well if the 2k
installation is clean and some housekeeping is done first (defrag,
uninstall unused apps, run a registry cleaner, etc.) I find apps don't
need reinstalling afterwards, and it's an idea to delete as much as you
can from Device Mangler to force 2k to install native drivers for the
hardware.

Also worth checking if the FS on the boot drive is FAT32 - a conversion
to NTFS is well worth it - at the command prompt:

convert c: /fs:ntfs

XP is basically 2k with a teletubby interface - it's practically the
same under the hood.

XP to 7 is another story - had some success on an XP with minimal apps
installed, but an older, more complex setup didn't work well. You can't
go direct - you have to upgrade to Vi$ta first.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[MM]

I hit another ruddy snag! In addition to making a TrueImage image,
which I have now completed, I wanted to copy certain folders from the
W2K drive to another drive across the network using straightforward
copy in Windows Explorer. But WE has this bloody irritaing habit of
stopping (aborting) if a file cannot be copied. From the web, someone
described the problem admirably:

"When copying many files, the copy function aborts if a file cannot be
copied, leaving the user unsure of which files have been copied and
which ones have not.

This is a big failing of Windows Explorer and it is the reason I
changed to FreeCommander, but I am disappointed it has the same
weakness. There are other (better) programs that will skip a problem
file and continue to copy the rest of the selected files."

Well, exactly that happened to me. I set the copy process running at
around midnight, then came back just now to see that it was stuck on a
particular file. Clicked OK, copying aborted, and now I don't know
which files were copied and which not. Stupid Windows!

I've already tried several 3rd-party programs, mainly shareware, that
all leave a lot to be desired. TeraCopy is the latest and its
interface is horrible. Another program, Advanced Data Copy Tool,
didn't seem to do anything in trial mode (so how is one supposed to
evaluate it, then??!!). Looks pretty, but totally useless.

If anyone has a suggestion for copying complete folder trees and/or
individual files and for the copying to continue even if one or more
files can NOT be copied for whatever reason (and then list at the end
the files that failed), I would be pleased to hear it. I could knock
something up in Visual Basic, but what the heck?!! Just to get a bunch
of folders/files from one PC to another? Crazy.

MM

[Java Jive]

Although it's rather tedious, because it does a byte-by-byte
comparison, you can see what files are different or absent between two
folders using WindDiff, which comes with both the 2k and the XP
Support Tools packages, on the XP CD in the Support\Tools folder
(choose complete installation to get Windiff), and also IIRC freely
downloadable from MS as an individual tool, assuming that you can
actually find the download.

There's also Unstoppable Copy, WinCompare, and WindSync, but I can't
remember much about any of them.

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 05:17:50 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I hit another ruddy snag! In addition to making a TrueImage image,
> which I have now completed, I wanted to copy certain folders from the
> W2K drive to another drive across the network using straightforward
> copy in Windows Explorer. But WE has this bloody irritaing habit of
> stopping (aborting) if a file cannot be copied. From the web, someone
> described the problem admirably:

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <19XurCPN...@jasper.org.uk>, Mike Tomlinson
<mi...@jasper.org.uk> escribió:

>and it's an idea to delete as much as you
>can from Device Mangler to force 2k to install

XP, dammit, not 2k.

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 06:01:33 +0100, Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>Although it's rather tedious, because it does a byte-by-byte
>comparison, you can see what files are different or absent between two
>folders using WindDiff, which comes with both the 2k and the XP
>Support Tools packages, on the XP CD in the Support\Tools folder
>(choose complete installation to get Windiff), and also IIRC freely
>downloadable from MS as an individual tool, assuming that you can
>actually find the download.
>
>There's also Unstoppable Copy, WinCompare, and WindSync, but I can't
>remember much about any of them.

Ah, good, there are some more to try. Since I installed TeraCopy,
which is free for non-commercial use, it does seem to work, though the
user interface is extremely poorly designed.

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 06:36:20 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
<mi...@jasper.org.uk> wrote:

>En el artículo <19XurCPN...@jasper.org.uk>, Mike Tomlinson
><mi...@jasper.org.uk> escribió:
>
>>and it's an idea to delete as much as you
>>can from Device Mangler to force 2k to install
>
>XP, dammit, not 2k.

Don't worry, I got that!

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 06:01:33 +0100, Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>Although it's rather tedious, because it does a byte-by-byte
>comparison, you can see what files are different or absent between two
>folders using WindDiff, which comes with both the 2k and the XP
>Support Tools packages, on the XP CD in the Support\Tools folder
>(choose complete installation to get Windiff), and also IIRC freely
>downloadable from MS as an individual tool, assuming that you can
>actually find the download.
>
>There's also Unstoppable Copy, WinCompare, and WindSync, but I can't
>remember much about any of them.

By the way, you can't sleep either? ;)

(Even the cocks hadn't started crowing when I began another fine day
at the computer coalface at around 4am... I know I'm gonna feel
knackered later on...)

MM

[polygonum]

IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit size.
Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other aspects.

--
Rod

[polygonum]

On 14/06/2013 05:17, MM wrote:
<>
>
> If anyone has a suggestion for copying complete folder trees and/or
> individual files and for the copying to continue even if one or more
> files can NOT be copied for whatever reason (and then list at the end
> the files that failed), I would be pleased to hear it. I could knock
> something up in Visual Basic, but what the heck?!! Just to get a bunch
> of folders/files from one PC to another? Crazy.
>

I think most of us who have had to move lots of files have hit
Explorer's crap behaviour!

xcopy
SyncToy
RichCopy

(I have often been constrained to use what is on the system, so
third-party things - however good - might have been out.)

--
Rod

[Eric]

MM wrote ...

Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 07:53, polygonum wrote:
> IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit size.
> Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other aspects.
>

God, the joys of linux. Never worrying about all this shit because the
operating systems/file systsm is self optimising and self de fragging*.

*well its obviously more complicated than that..

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[Eric]

MM wrote ...

<snipped>

> If anyone has a suggestion for copying complete folder trees and/or
> individual files and for the copying to continue even if one or more
> files can NOT be copied for whatever reason (and then list at the end
> the files that failed), I would be pleased to hear it. I could knock
> something up in Visual Basic, but what the heck?!! Just to get a bunch
> of folders/files from one PC to another? Crazy.
>
> MM

Try comparing the contents of finished folders - this is one program
that claims to be do the job - there are probably others.

Compare Folders 1.2

[The Other Mike]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:01:15 +0100, Eric <Ti...@to.ms> wrote:

>MM wrote ...
>
>>
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:57:59 +0100, Peter Percival
>> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >MM wrote:
>> >> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
>> >
>> >Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
>> >I'd like to know where it can be bought from.
>>
>> Amazon has several different versions, from around £100.

>Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay

Maybe you can, but maybe it is something that looks like Windows but it will
either not activate or get clobbered by Microsoft for licence issues at a later
date.

I've got a few copies of XP from ebay a few years back that are still in their
shrinkwrap, with hologram stickers, but Microsoft wouldn't let them be
activated. These packs were Microsoft branded XP, not some vendor/platform
specific version). They passed ALL the visual check procedures. They look as
genuine as any other genuine version.

I got my money back and kept the goods. The problem with supply of the OS was
fixed by alternative methods.






--

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:57:21 +0100, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk>
wrote:

Dunno whether SyncToy has to be installed on BOTH computers (source
and destination), but if so it wouldn't work, because W2K appears to
be unsupported.

Thanks anyway. I have now almost completed my file-by-file backup and
it turned out that TeraCopy was okay. You get to skip a file that is
locked, then you can click on Skip All for all future such files. Then
you get a list at the end to say which files failed to get copied.

MM

[Peter Percival]

No use to me, the computer I have in mind (currently running NT) hasn't
to oomph for Win7!

--
I think I am an Elephant,
Behind another Elephant
Behind /another/ Elephant who isn't really there....
A.A. Milne

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:01:15 +0100, Eric <Ti...@to.ms> wrote:

...and then you discover that it won't pass the Windows Activation
stage...

MM

[Brian Gaff]

Hmm, well its been a long time ago, but from memory, it was a mixed feast.
Drivers certainly did not work, many apps did, but of course I cannot recall
which. There were also unexplained weird crashes after this, and in the end
it was thought more reliable to simply bite the bullet, wipe it off and do
a clean install and yes, itst took ages then another millenium to get all
the updates and all the updates to the updates, well you know how this
works!

Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active

"MM" <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:idojr8hrgha5auoah...@4ax.com...

> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,

> printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
> typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
> of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.
>

> It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
> When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
> reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
> collating all the installation disks.
>

[MM]

Yeah, Microtoss really tries harder than anyone to piss us off. And
now they have the audacity to foist the abortion commonly known as
Windows 8 on the world.

MM

[The Natural Philosopher]

And all the inbuilt diseases in it too.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 10:57, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <kpeiqh$80n$4...@news.albasani.net>,

> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 14/06/13 07:53, polygonum wrote:
>> > IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit
>> size. > Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other aspects.
>> >
>> God, the joys of linux. Never worrying about all this shit because
>> the operating systems/file systsm is self optimising and self de
>> fragging*.
>>
>> *well its obviously more complicated than that..
>

> Generally speaking, the joys of *not* using windows. An OS upgrade
> means you lose all your apps? What kind of shit is that?
>
well I wouldn't care to GURANTEE that a total linux upgrade to a new
RELEASE wont crap on something.

BUT at least the programs are all free to download all over gain.

[whisky-dave]

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 7:14:34 PM UTC+1, John Williamson wrote:
> MM wrote:
>
> > I too would RATHER install clean from scratch, but I break out in a
>
> > cold sweat when I review my Programs folder and see what lies ahead to
>
> > reinstall everything.
>
> >
>
> The way I deal with this problem is to install Windows, then, as I find
>
> a need for a program, I install it.

Of course the first should be anti-virus software.


> What I also do is, when I first install a program from its CD or DVD is
>
> to make an image of the install media with a note of any necessary
>
> validation codes in the same folder.

Yes a very good idea and if you've a few old USB sticks even better.
As a mac user I can put the OS installer on a stick and install from there, so much faster than from DVD.

> Very few programs won't install
>
> from an image, and it's a *lot* faster than using the original media. On
>
> occasion, it can feel faster to rip an image and install from that than
>
> to install from the original media.

>
>
>
> --
>
> Tciao for Now!
>
>
>
> John.

[polygonum]

On 14/06/2013 07:53, polygonum wrote:
<>
>
> IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit size.
> Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other aspects.
>

"When you use the Convert.exe utility to convert a FAT partition to
NTFS, Windows always uses the original FAT cluster size as the NTFS
cluster size for cluster sizes up to 4 KB. If the FAT cluster size is
greater than 4 KB, then the clusters are converted down to 4 KB in NTFS.
This is because the FAT structures are aligned on cluster boundaries.
Therefore, any larger cluster size would not allow for the conversion to
function. Note also when formatting a partition under Windows NT 3.5,
3.51, and 4.0 Setup, the partition is first formatted to FAT and then
converted to NTFS, so the cluster size will also always be as described
earlier when a partition is formatted in Setup."

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/140365

--
Rod

[whisky-dave]

On Friday, June 14, 2013 1:20:19 AM UTC+1, Tony Bryer wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:18:01 +0100 Mm wrote :
>
> > I wouldn't touch Win8 with a bargepole from what *I've* seen of it.
>
> > Bloody awful PoS.
>
>
>
> A case of the lunatics taking over the asylum. I upgraded my laptop to
>
> have a Win8 machine for testing and could not quite believe how bad it is.
>
> One example: rather than include Acrobat Viewer they have written their
>
> own. OK but if there's way to print the PDF you're looking at (just the
>
> sort of thing you might want to do if someone sends you a PDF email
>
> attachment) I can't find it. For all the jokes in the past as to why you
>
> press the Start button to stop your computer, at least there was a pretty
>
> obvious way of doing so. Not in Win8

I'm a Mac user, but someone that works on PCs and has put W8 on a 5 year old laptop and finding it runs better under W8 than W7 once you remove the tiles features and get it back to more like clasic windows install this.

http://www.iobit.com/iobitstartmenu8.php

> And, yes, I know there are various third party offerings to 'fix' Win8 but
>
> a good few users of my software will use it as it comes so I have to feel
>
> their pain :)

As a windows user aren't you expected to have and feel more panes ;-)

[The Other Mike]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:19:12 +0100, MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,

>printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
>typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
>of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.
>
>It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
>When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
>reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
>collating all the installation disks.
>
>By the way I will make a TrueImage backup image of the entire disk
>before starting the upgrade process.
>
>Thanks for any tips in this regard.

You could quite easily spend a day and a dozen reboots on installing updates for
XP before you even get round to reinstalling apps. Why not jump to W7 as you can
run many W2k/XP apps in W7 compatability mode, alternatively run a W2k virtual
machine under W7 or linux on modern very fast hardware.

PC's that will run W7 are dirt cheap and keeping your original PC can mitigate
against the chance of f*cking up the migration. A KVM switch can mean you can
keep working with your exisitng keyboard, screen and mouse while migrating
across.

It is advantageous to keep 'data' on redundant external storage, keeping the
main hard drive for the OS and apps.

Above all recognise that migration using existing hardware is always a bodge.
New installs are in my experience always quicker. SSD's can also speed up an
end of the line surplus PC that is two or three years old.

The biggest issue I find at upgrade time is the number of expansion slots for
dedicated hardware, hence why I still have some PC's running W2K with ISA slots
and XP with PCI slots, both with parallel and RS232 serial ports - I even have a
laptop from 1997 that gets used once or twice a month (Win 95 running a dos app
that needs a real serial port)

Of course I find there is no need to upgrade the keyboard used at the desktop -
a 25 year old IBM from a PS/2 that went to the dump 20 years ago.

--

[polygonum]

On 14/06/2013 12:16, The Other Mike wrote:
> A KVM switch can mean you can
> keep working with your exisitng keyboard, screen and mouse while migrating
> across.

There is a "software KVM" on MS' site somewhere that allows you to use
multiple PCs as if they were <somewhere between one PC and PCs connected
using a real KVM>. Mouse pointer slides across like multi-monitor set up.

--
Rod

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:17:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher

<t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 14/06/13 10:57, Tim Streater wrote:
>> In article <kpeiqh$80n$4...@news.albasani.net>,
>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/06/13 07:53, polygonum wrote:
>>> > IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit
>>> size. > Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other aspects.
>>> >
>>> God, the joys of linux. Never worrying about all this shit because
>>> the operating systems/file systsm is self optimising and self de
>>> fragging*.
>>>
>>> *well its obviously more complicated than that..
>>
>> Generally speaking, the joys of *not* using windows. An OS upgrade
>> means you lose all your apps? What kind of shit is that?
>>
>well I wouldn't care to GURANTEE that a total linux upgrade to a new
>RELEASE wont crap on something.
>
>BUT at least the programs are all free to download all over gain.

The downside is...

...it's Linux!

(I gave up on Linux after Ubuntu v8, having tried countless distros
before that. Linux never seemed to grow up to be a professional OS,
but an OS for geeks.)

MM

[Adrian]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:47:38 +0100, MM wrote:

> (I gave up on Linux after Ubuntu v8

Ubuntu doesn't have version numbers. It has release dates. The current
version, 13.04, was released April 2013. Next is 13.10 in October.

So the one you're judging by was released five years and around ten
versions ago...

That's really quite a long while in the evolution of Linux as a desktop
OS.

[Eric]

The Natural Philosopher wrote ...

>
> On 14/06/13 09:01, Eric wrote:
> > MM wrote ...
> >
> >> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:57:59 +0100, Peter Percival
> >> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> MM wrote:
> >>>> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
> >>> Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
> >>> I'd like to know where it can be bought from.
> >> Amazon has several different versions, from around £100.
> >>
> >> MM
> >
> > Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay
> >
> And all the inbuilt diseases in it too.

You really have it in for Microsoft don't you.

[whisky-dave]

probaley has good reasons, but I don't see it as a dig at windows or MS it's more a fact of life you have to deal with especailly from ebay or other sites that appear to offer a genuine products.

FAKE WINDOWS 7 ULTIMATES ON EBAY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iX9T5xOATc

[MM]

Well, I worked with Ubuntu as a try-out OS from about version 6 to
version 8 (they had bloody childish animal names for the different
issues, IIRC), then along came version 10 and it was different. Just
different, All the work I'd put into getting a suite of apps working
(getting MIDI to work was a friggin' nightmare), I had to do again.
So, I wiped the disk and said "never again".

MM

[The Natural Philosopher]

Ah well I held off (apart from servers, where I built one first around
1998) until essentially around 2010, which would ave been a bit later
than that you tried.

My windows 98 was dying the death.

And rather than plonking down cash, I decided that in all likelhiood a
lunx setup on a new machine was worh playing with. :Leaving the win 98
machine stiill tunning 'in case'

Eventually I discovered I wasn't using the win 98 machine any more
except for three programs. Then I discovered VMware/virtual box and
managed to install an old copy of XP in that, and te three programs I
neeeded. Which was a good thing, because the 98 box got rained on, and
that was the end of it.

Thts waa OK, but late last year I upgraded to a test MInt install. That
was so MUCH better that I ditched the old debian installation. Copying
the old Virtual XP machine across to the new installation. Windows, and
its now TWO programs only, came across unscathed.

I never went beyond XP. Linux mint is streets more usable. I have an XP
installation for the couple of windows programs I cant do without.
Everything including the windows installation is automatically backed up
onto a debian based server.

If I need XP, it boots from a saved image in less than 10 seconds. Up to
and including the programs and files that were open. Its just another
window apon another virtual screen. If I had more RAM., Id lesave it
riunning all teh time, but since shutting tit down gives me half my RAM
back and only takes 10 seconds, I don't.

I have a fully functional word browser and mail program

I have a decent scanner and printer.

I have a graphics program that will process my photos.

I have a TV dongle that allows me to watch and record TV..onto the
networked server, which feeds the smart TV downstairs as well.

I have a Quark/ Creative suite style page editor (scribus)that allows me
to generate documents typographically, though usually SWMBO does that on
quark and the Macintosh.

I have a nicer analogue of Execl/Word/Powerpoint in Libre office,

I have currently eight workspaces that entirely replace my screen with a
different one, so I can do multiple jobs just by switching between
screens. Windows sits in one of them

I have a weather miniapp pinned to the top to let me see at a glance
what the weather is like at the nearest RAF station that actually
publishes that data.

It is rock solid.

I never need to edit the registry. Or fight the firewall. I neither have
one on the desktop nor need one.

The disk never needs de fragging.

I have no CPU clogging virus scanner, because 99% of viruses don't work
on Linux, and of the ones that do, they cant fuck with the operating
system because I run as a user with limited privilieges.

I can use my digital camera in raw mode, because someone just wrote a
plugin to GIMP that reads it flawlessly. The camera looks just like a
USB drive, so accessing its pictures is really easy.

I comes with a free C compiler. And many free languages like PERL,
Python and PHP. If I want to write my own desktop apps, I can.

I can set up tasks like routine system backups or system checks, or even
reminding me which rubbish bin I need top leave out this week, easily
and tailor them to my needs.


I cant run Rhino CAD or Corel draw on it, so I run them in the XP. The
two programs I still cant do without. Yes the screen update is a shade
slower, but its well fast enough. It takes longer to load them into XP
than it does to boot XP from a saved state.

Its far and away a better environment for me than OS-X on a mac, or XP
on a PVC. I have not bothered to even look at Windows Vista/7/8.

I only reboot it after serious kernel upgrades, It has only hung on me
once when accesssing a mounted file system somewhere in London., when I
lost the Internet. I MIGHT have been able to restore it woithut
rebooting, but it needed one anytway. A good idea to fsck the file
systems every couple of months.

It cost me NOTHING. Beyond the bare bones hardware.

It is without exception the most stable and usable desktop I have EVER
used.

Yes, I did go hunting around for the 'best' programs to do what I
needed, and trying them all out took time as did getting the appearance
'just the way I wanted it' with the task bars and menu panels where I
wanted them with what I wanted on them. But at least I COULD do that. I
cant answer fort later windows, but XP is simply 'the way XP is' . Even
OS-X is not nearly as customisable. OK that may make it easier for
complete dorks to get it running, but we are, one hopes, not complete
dorks, and when you spend as much time as I do in front of a computer,
it pays itself back in making it easy to do what you routinely need to do.

If you want a toy, stick to windows. Otherwise if you want a stable
environment you can WORK with, get Linux. Even upgades - almsit daily
there are SOME - are simply a matter of clicking on the update icon
when it detects them, saying 'yes' and then getting on and doing
something else while it updates itself.

No need to reboot.

These days its comfortably AHEAD of at least XP, and OS-X. I've never
seen anything I needed on peoples WIN vista/7/8 setups. But I've seen a
lot of stuff missing.
The only downside is lack of commercial third party applications.

For those, there is windows stripped to the bone sandboxed to the hilt
running in a virtual box. Where its a devil of a sight safer.

The only conceivable reason I could ever want to run windows native on
the hardware, is to play games.

It's also true that Microsoft is now working with hardware manufacturers
to make it difficult if not impossible to actually load linux onto some
machines. If the machine wont run linux, I simply wont buy it.

Its always been more reliable and stable than windowos. These days its
even more usable. With MINT its even dare I say it more user friendly to
set up.

It just isn't quite so easy for total dorks, because it doesn't come
preinstalled.

well how many times have you had to reinstall windows? I've NEVER had to
reinstall linux, unless I was moving from one distro to another.

I gave up on windows, because it wasn't an OS for professional users,
just for dorks. Luckily they are now all fondling slabs, which come
with preinstalled linux (android) or preinstalled Macintosh crap.

The desktop workstation future and the server belongs to Linux really.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 14:45, Jethro_uk wrote:

> Yes, but for me, upgrading 10.04->12.04 (which is an LTS release)
> completely borked my system. In the end I had to wipe and install Debian
> (which I am very happy with). But I don't rely too much on the GUI, so
> XFCE is good enough for me.
I would expect that upgrading major versions would be enough of a change
to be essentially a complete reinstall, yes.

I did that with debian to mint. Let's faceit the debian was about three
releases behind with all the apps anyway, so reinstalling them would
have to happen one way or another.

My data of course is all held on the server. Just a patch of fstab and
there it was, in its usual place..oh and a patch of thunderbird to tell
it where the mail
was . Up came the last fifteen years of email. Must have taken all of a
minute.

The point is that with broadband, installation is painless anyway. User
synaptic on a raw install, click on all the programs you used to have,
hit theh go button and leave it to chug away

By far and away the greatest time is spent customising the desktop to
take advantage of all the new features that were the reason you upgraded
in the first place.

My server is till running debian lenny. I cant be arsed to upgarade
that. It runs just fine. As and when the hardware packs up..well then I
will build a bigger better one and stick something newer on it.

[Eric]

whisky-dave wrote ...

That video is over 2 years old.


Have you actually bothered to look at the current sales of Dell Win 7
Pro on ebay? There's plenty of positive feedback - con artists would
soon be sussed.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No, that wasnt aimed at microsoft, that was aimed at 'cheap software off
the net'.

I had a friend who would torrent loads of 'cracked' software off the
net, including Windows. His machine was unstable and always full of
malware.

I won't say I have never installed cracked software but by golly, I am
careful. And usually it gets totally removed when I finally buy the product.

A lot of stugff in ebay is stolen, orcopied, and the codes dont work, or
they are cracked codes, and the installers have been patched to add the
malware. THEY don't care. money back, but your PC now belongs to them.

Because you ran the install script, didn't you?

[stuart noble]

I know sweet fa about all this except that many printers and scanners
that worked on XP don't on Win7. Ebay is littered with perfectly good
scanners that fetch next to nothing. Updated drivers often don't work.
Can get expensive if you need to replace both, so I keep the xp/Win7
dual boot going

[Peter Percival]

Peter Percival wrote:

>
> No use to me, the computer I have in mind (currently running NT) hasn't
> to oomph for Win7!

I surely meant "hasn't the oomph".

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 15:38, stuart noble wrote:
>
> I know sweet fa about all this except that many printers and scanners
> that worked on XP don't on Win7. Ebay is littered with perfectly good
> scanners that fetch next to nothing. Updated drivers often don't work.
> Can get expensive if you need to replace both, so I keep the xp/Win7
> dual boot going

nearly ALL legacy printers and MOST older scanners work on Linux. At
least as far as a basic scan to image goes.

Scanner support is actually one of the worst aspects of Linux these
days. But its the newer ones that dont work..it takes time to reverse
engineer them and come up with drivers. A few latest greatest printrers
too are somewhat unsupported, though I have usually found something
'close enough' that to all intents and purposes works.

With printers since OS-X uses the same underlying print system, the PPDs
'printer description files - are generally available on Linux now as
well. You can steal them off the 'installation' DVD'

scanners need to be checked thoroughly

There is some ability to get 'close enough' but some simply wont work at
all, and others may in fact burn out if driven past the endstops etc.

If there is one piece of crud left in Linux, its SANE.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 15:45, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:19:04 +0100, MM wrote:
>
>> Well, I worked with Ubuntu as a try-out OS from about version 6 to
>> version 8 (they had bloody childish animal names for the different
>> issues, IIRC),

> They still do ... currently we're on (checks) Raring Ringtail, and the
> next (13.10) release is Saucy Salamander ...
MInt is all herbal..cinnamon etc ..

Mine is based on 'precise pangolin' ubuntu IIRC

Apart from the name, it seems pretty good really.

I probably will go up two releases and reinstall EVERYTHING sometime
this year :-)

[Scion]

Tony Bryer put finger to keyboard:

> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:18:01 +0100 Mm wrote :
>> I wouldn't touch Win8 with a bargepole from what *I've* seen of it.
>> Bloody awful PoS.
>
> A case of the lunatics taking over the asylum. I upgraded my laptop to
> have a Win8 machine for testing and could not quite believe how bad it
> is.
> One example: rather than include Acrobat Viewer they have written their
> own. OK but if there's way to print the PDF you're looking at (just the
> sort of thing you might want to do if someone sends you a PDF email
> attachment) I can't find it.

Control-P?

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/06/13 16:08, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <kpeqjk$o7g$3...@news.albasani.net>,

> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 14/06/13 10:57, Tim Streater wrote:
>> > In article <kpeiqh$80n$4...@news.albasani.net>,
>> > The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 14/06/13 07:53, polygonum wrote:
>> >> > IIRC "convert" leaves the drive with the minimum allocation unit
>> >> size. > Which impacts on performance, fragmentation and other
>> aspects.
>> >> >
>> >> God, the joys of linux. Never worrying about all this shit because
>> >> the operating systems/file systsm is self optimising and self de
>> >> fragging*.
>> >>
>> >> *well its obviously more complicated than that..
>> >
>> > Generally speaking, the joys of *not* using windows. An OS upgrade
>> > means you lose all your apps? What kind of shit is that?
>> >
>> well I wouldn't care to GURANTEE that a total linux upgrade to a new
>> RELEASE wont crap on something.
>>
>> BUT at least the programs are all free to download all over gain.
>

> For at least the last 4 OS X major releases, all I've done is install
> the OS and then carry on (except when I've changed hardware). It even
> remembers my minor tweaks, such as minor changes to the apache config
> file, etc. I have difficulty understanding why any of my apps should
> be involved.
>
Ideally they shouldn't be. Sometimes. inexplicably, they are.

Let me explain.

When you upgarde OSX, ALL you are upgrading is the OS, and such few
programs as Apple cares to bundle with it. Those are all thoroughly
tested to ensure that they understand the previous versions config
files and behive well using them, or rewrite them to do 'the right
thing'. Apple charges you a lot to do a lot of hard workto make this as
seamless as possible.

when you move distros on Liinux, EVERY SINGLE PROGRAM you installed via
that distro may be a newer version. Now again, IF the app writers and
distro people have in fact done that right, up will come the new apps.
BUT if they app writers have been sloppy, and the new version works on
the new distro but does NOT understand the old config fles, it may come
up partially broken.,

FFS I even had that problem in reverse installing a completely NEW
program on OS-X. It would not work because it expected at least a
skeleton of a file system and directory to be in place FROM A PREVIOUS
VERSION.

In short when you upgrade a major distro EVERYTHING INCLUDING THE APPS
gets upgraded.

That's nice, in that you get the latest greatest of everything, but the
potential for a mismatch is not trivial.

Its either a massive strength or a massive weakness of the whole distro
mechanism.

Apart from the third party stuff you may have installed - and I think in
my case that's ONLY google earth, which I went direct to google for,
because I was having issues and tried every version I could find before
upgrading my video driver to fix the issue - EVERY SINGLE APP GETS UPGRADED.

Its that fantastic? all youre apps upgraded? or is it a disaster? Somer
don't work. Its normally not TOO bad, install the app completely and
reinstall usually gets past that. But at some point te wiser user
decides that its ' better to reinstall over the top of everything
(leaving the home and probably var partitions alone) which means you
may well be stick with a lot of wiped out configs.

The general advice is back the thing up, and try the upgrade, if that
fucks up then clean install and use the backup to reinstate config
files selectively.

Consider: In your old distro you had a packages named special-app123 it
was routinely upgraded and when that distro was lasted accessed, its now
called special-app123 version.10.14.pb
IN te NEW distro its called special-app124 version 10.19.23x. So far so
good. Except you have skipped a distro, and the point at which the
upgrade parth went from k one thing to the nexct, has been missed. The
distro is expecting you to upgrade from a previous version that you
never in fact installed. It might fail to upare at all, in which acse
you will have the old app and as long ios te livraries are backwards
compatible it will still work. Or it may upgrade to the new but somehow
miss installing something else it needed - the new config file that was
created when the versions you missed came along. In which case it may
simply fail to start.


TBH there usually isn't MUCH done config wise by the user. Modst config
stuff resides on a per user basis in te .something hidden files and
directories in the users home directory, and reinstallation generally
leaves that alone. Or you restre it as part of te general thing.

the odd tweak you may have done in the machine area generally /etc - is
more applicable to servers than desktops. /var is the big worry, because
that's where mail websites and database data often lives. But apart from
mail that's server side stuff and not what many users will mess with
unkess they already know how to fix it.

[Mark]

"Eric" <Ti...@to.ms> wrote in message
news:MPG.2c24de2bf...@news.aioe.org...

> MM wrote ...
>
>>
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:57:59 +0100, Peter Percival
>> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >MM wrote:
>> >> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
>> >
>> >Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
>> >I'd like to know where it can be bought from.
>>
>> Amazon has several different versions, from around £100.
>>
>> MM
>
>
> Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay
>

Jeez, you can download win7 Ultimate for free from softpedia
and a working corporate key is easy to find
the Ultimate download will also install as Pro or Home if you have a key i.e
laptop with no re-install disc.

-

[Eric]

The Natural Philosopher wrote ...

> >>> Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay
> >>>
> >> And all the inbuilt diseases in it too.
> >
> > You really have it in for Microsoft don't you.
> >
> No, that wasnt aimed at microsoft, that was aimed at 'cheap software off
> the net'.
>
> I had a friend who would torrent loads of 'cracked' software off the
> net, including Windows. His machine was unstable and always full of
> malware.
>
> I won't say I have never installed cracked software but by golly, I am
> careful. And usually it gets totally removed when I finally buy the product.
>
> A lot of stugff in ebay is stolen, orcopied, and the codes dont work, or
> they are cracked codes, and the installers have been patched to add the
> malware. THEY don't care. money back, but your PC now belongs to them.
>
> Because you ran the install script, didn't you?

Some of us have a clue.

I've been running cracked XP Pro for 10 years, brother cracked Win 7 for
3 years. I've installed many hacked/crack programs over the years and
never had a virus or any other kind of shit. That includes software
that costs £3,000+.

[Adrian]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:59:19 +0000, Mark wrote:

> Jeez, you can download win7 Ultimate for free from softpedia and a
> working corporate key is easy to find the Ultimate download will also
> install as Pro or Home if you have a key i.e laptop with no re-install
> disc.

Which, of course, doesn't make it in any way a legitimate copy - and if
it's a key that's that easy to find, there's a very good chance that you
may suddenly find updates etc failing to work since MS have blocked it.

If you're going to use commercial closed-source pay-to-use software,
that's fine - but do it properly and legally, and PAY to use it. Don't
steal it.

[Mark]

"Adrian" <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kpff3t$9ir$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:59:19 +0000, Mark wrote:
>
>> Jeez, you can download win7 Ultimate for free from softpedia and a
>> working corporate key is easy to find the Ultimate download will also
>> install as Pro or Home if you have a key i.e laptop with no re-install
>> disc.
>
>

> If you're going to use commercial closed-source pay-to-use software,
> that's fine - but do it properly and legally, and PAY to use it. Don't
> steal it.

True but i just don't have any sense of morals where Microsoft is concerned
they have made a fortune with restrictive licensing so it's an eye for an
eye.

-

[dennis@home]

Acrobat has never been included in windows, its a product of Adobe.
Until recently it was patented and you couldn't include anything for
reading PDFs.

> For all the jokes in the past as to why you
> press the Start button to stop your computer, at least there was a pretty
> obvious way of doing so. Not in Win8

Maybe the win 8.1 update will fix it?
It will at the least allow to option to go straight to the desktop.

>
> And, yes, I know there are various third party offerings to 'fix' Win8 but
> a good few users of my software will use it as it comes so I have to feel
> their pain :)
>

Just include an option to install one of the solutions.

[dennis@home]

On 14/06/2013 09:40, Peter Percival wrote:

> No use to me, the computer I have in mind (currently running NT) hasn't
> to oomph for Win7!
>

I think you will find that if it has the oomph for XP then win7 or win8
will be fine.

[John Rumm]

On 14/06/2013 05:17, MM wrote:

> If anyone has a suggestion for copying complete folder trees and/or
> individual files and for the copying to continue even if one or more
> files can NOT be copied for whatever reason (and then list at the end
> the files that failed), I would be pleased to hear it. I could knock
> something up in Visual Basic, but what the heck?!! Just to get a bunch
> of folders/files from one PC to another? Crazy.


If you can cope with the command line:

xcopy source dest /s/e/c/h/z

(switches control sub dirs, include empty ones, continue after errors,
copy hidden files, and do network files in restartable mode)

Failing that, a utility like DirSyncPro is quite handy for doing more
complicated sync operations.

(note also the explorer copy dialogue in Win 7 is better than in XP -
its still not "good", but its better!)


--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[dennis@home]

On 14/06/2013 12:49, Adrian wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:47:38 +0100, MM wrote:
>
>> (I gave up on Linux after Ubuntu v8
>
> Ubuntu doesn't have version numbers. It has release dates. The current
> version, 13.04, was released April 2013. Next is 13.10 in October.
>
> So the one you're judging by was released five years and around ten
> versions ago...
>
> That's really quite a long while in the evolution of Linux as a desktop
> OS.
>

Most of the time linux users are comparing linux to XP and that was
released twice as long ago.

[The Other Mike]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:13:00 +0100, "dennis@home"
<den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

>On 14/06/2013 01:20, Tony Bryer wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:18:01 +0100 Mm wrote :
>>> I wouldn't touch Win8 with a bargepole from what *I've* seen of it.
>>> Bloody awful PoS.
>>
>> A case of the lunatics taking over the asylum. I upgraded my laptop to
>> have a Win8 machine for testing and could not quite believe how bad it is.
>> One example: rather than include Acrobat Viewer they have written their
>> own. OK but if there's way to print the PDF you're looking at (just the
>> sort of thing you might want to do if someone sends you a PDF email
>> attachment) I can't find it.
>
>Acrobat has never been included in windows, its a product of Adobe.
>Until recently it was patented and you couldn't include anything for
>reading PDFs.

Adobe published the format around twenty years ago and it's been an ISO standard
for nearly five years.

--

[polygonum]

On 14/06/2013 19:13, dennis@home wrote:
> Acrobat has never been included in windows, its a product of Adobe.
> Until recently it was patented and you couldn't include anything for
> reading PDFs.

I rather suspect you mean Adobe Reader.

Which, even though the rights are owned by Adobe, is available to be
distributed by filling in a simple license agreement:

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=distribution_form&pv=rdr

--
Rod

[SteveW]

On 13/06/2013 23:36, tony sayer wrote:
> In article <51ba4345$0$12281$c3e8da3$6901...@news.astraweb.com>,
> dennis@home <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> scribeth thus
>> On 13/06/2013 16:48, MM wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:21:37 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
>>
>>
>>>> I would jump a decade and start again with Windows 7 and re-install
>>>> everything while you still can. (Don't jump to Windows 8 because that is
>>>> daft).
>>>
>>> Can't afford Windows 7 twice. Just paid £170 last week for one bona
>>> fide Win 7 Ultimate from MS. Anyway, XP is all I need for everyday
>>> word processing, and VB6 can be a bit "iffy"under Win7.
>>
>> Win 8 is win 7 and is cheaper.
>
> And is a pile of cack..

Windows 8 Pro, plus a free download of Classic Start Menu gives you an
up to date operating system that looks like whichever version of Windows
you choose. I got two copies of Win 8 when they were £25 a piece before
the end of January and both have been running very well - one on a
fairly modern PC and the other on a somewhat older one.

SteveW

[The Natural Philosopher]

That's only because XP ceased to be better than linux in any way about
that time ago.

Linux users haven't bothered to look at windows since then. It didnt
have anyuthiung they wanted or needed.

[Eric]

Huge wrote ...

>
> On 2013-06-14, Eric <Ti...@to.ms> wrote:
>
> > I've been running cracked XP Pro for 10 years, brother cracked Win 7 for
> > 3 years. I've installed many hacked/crack programs over the years and
> > never had a virus or any other kind of shit. That includes software
> > that costs £3,000+.
>

> Translation: "I am a thief."


Have you said that to Microsoft, Google, Ebay, Amazon etc etc ?

Course not, you're a fucking twat.

GFY

[Eric]

Mark wrote ...

I was telling him what to do, not what I do.

[Eric]

Mark wrote ...

Microsoft have also been caught for stealing IP from other software
companies.

http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/14559

[Adrian]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:54:58 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

>> Ubuntu doesn't have version numbers. It has release dates. The current
>> version, 13.04, was released April 2013. Next is 13.10 in October.
>>
>> So the one you're judging by was released five years and around ten
>> versions ago...
>>
>> That's really quite a long while in the evolution of Linux as a desktop
>> OS.

> Most of the time linux users are comparing linux to XP and that was
> released twice as long ago.

I'm obviously imagining this machine being dual-boot with W7, then.

Oh, wait. Sorry. I forgot - the W7 partition died last time I upgraded
the drive, and I CBA to resuscitate it, since I never used it anyway.

[John Rumm]

Speed wise probably, the issue with some older machines though is
memory. 1GB in XP is usable for basic stuff, but its not really enough
for Win 7/8

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:45:28 GMT, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com>

wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:19:04 +0100, MM wrote:
>
>> Well, I worked with Ubuntu as a try-out OS from about version 6 to
>> version 8 (they had bloody childish animal names for the different
>> issues, IIRC),
>
>They still do ... currently we're on (checks) Raring Ringtail, and the
>next (13.10) release is Saucy Salamander ...

... bunch of kids, wet behind the ears!

Honestly, they have the world at their feet, given that the only other
viable OS are Windows or Mac, and what have they achieved after 15
years of buggering about? Totally amateurish systems. I expect they
have meetings to discuss important stuff like whether to call it Saucy
Salamander...

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:46:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>That's only because XP ceased to be better than linux in any way about
>that time ago.

Nonsense. As I upgrade my PC to XP, I grab a plethora of install disks
(CDs, floppies) and everything.just.works. You cannot say that about
Linux. It's all hit and miss. Some of the packages (when I was playing
with Ubuntu) worked, others did not. And with Windows, if anything
raises a question, well, then, there's the internet with its one
billion questions and answers about it.

I have well over 100 books on programming (VB, C, C++ Assembler, ADO,
SQL, MySQL, Sqlite etc etc), yet I never need to open any nowadays,
since a quick Google gives me the answer immediately, often with
sample code I can copy and paste. That ain't the case with Linux.
Because it's installed on so few computers, there just isn't the
wealth of experience as there is with Windows.

>Linux users haven't bothered to look at windows since then. It didnt
>have anyuthiung they wanted or needed.

It was probably more like they got depressed when they saw what a
professional operating system looked like!

The only situation in which I would reconsider Linux would be in an
embedded system in a gizmo of some kind, I dunno, Arduino-type gizmos,
perhaps, where there's no user interface needed and it just runs. For
that kind of application Linux probably excels. So for example,
imagine I'd got a tiny "PC" about the size of a box of Swan Vestas and
it just warns when someone leaves the kitchen without switching off
the stove. That kind of app. But you could achieve that with a Basic
Stamp anyway.

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 09:40:08 +0100, Peter Percival
<peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Eric wrote:
>> MM wrote ...
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 16:57:59 +0100, Peter Percival
>>> <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> MM wrote:
>>>>> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
>>>>
>>>> Do you already possess XP Pro or do you need to buy it? If the latter
>>>> I'd like to know where it can be bought from.
>>>
>>> Amazon has several different versions, from around £100.
>>>
>>> MM
>>
>>
>> Jeez, you can pick up Win 7 Pro for under £40 on Ebay
>

>No use to me, the computer I have in mind (currently running NT) hasn't
>to oomph for Win7!

Both my PCs I build 5 years ago with identical hardware, an Abit mobo
for £30 from Misco, RAM, AMD Sempron, and Windows 98SE. I'm upgrading
one to XP and the other I already upgraded to Win7 (the £170 purchase
I spoke about earlier in this thread). Win7 works fine on the 5-yo
mobo, no probs. Okay, so I'm not playing any computer games (never
have), but for everyday use, it's plenty fast enough. The only times
when I've really felt the need for a super-fast PC is when I'm mucking
about with movies, e.g. converting from one format to another. That
takes hours sometimes, whereas I'm sure that a quadcore superfast SOTA
CPU would get it done in 20 minutes.

The only hardware enhancement right now is my first graphics card! And
only because I bought a 24" BenQ monitor last week and established
that the mobo's onboard graphics won't support its max res of 1920 x
1080. My ancient mobo has an unused AGP slot, so I'm going to whack a
Club3D Radeon in it (£37 from Amazon), waiting for delivery. Should be
here Monday or Tuesday, yippee! My 19" CRT Hansol was getting a pain
when one has several windows open, e.g. Netobjects Fusion, VB etc.

MM

[MM]

Absolutely. The thing that worked for me and my 5-yo mobo was RAM,
more RAM and still more RAM! And the old mobo only supports up to 2GB
anyway, which is a paltry amount these days. But going from 1 to 2GB
made XP fly.

MM

[MM]

I certainly do agree about their restrictive licensing. They were
never satisfied with one arm, they always wanted an arm and a leg, and
then the other leg too (so they grudgingly left you one arm to get
about, do some typing, and pop to the bathroom).

MM

[MM]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:31:59 +0100, polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 14/06/2013 12:16, The Other Mike wrote:
>> A KVM switch can mean you can
>> keep working with your exisitng keyboard, screen and mouse while migrating
>> across.
>
>There is a "software KVM" on MS' site somewhere that allows you to use
>multiple PCs as if they were <somewhere between one PC and PCs connected
>using a real KVM>. Mouse pointer slides across like multi-monitor set up.

Latest update: I gave up on upgrading and have installed XP on a clean
drive. Reinstallation of all the software is taking forever, as I knew
it would, but I'm retired so it's not like I don't have the time!

MM

[Eric]

MM wrote ...

>
> Latest update: I gave up on upgrading and have installed XP on a clean
> drive. Reinstallation of all the software is taking forever, as I knew
> it would, but I'm retired so it's not like I don't have the time!
>

No surprise. Why not install software as and when you need it or one a
day. Most of us have too many unused programs that only slow down those
we do need.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Unused programs merely use up disk space.

Of course if there are programs that are being used, but are not doing
anything useful, that's another matter. Windows itself may well be one such.

[greyrid...@googlemail.com]

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 4:19:12 PM UTC+1, MM wrote:
> If I upgrade from Win 2K Pro to XP Pro, will all my installed apps,
>

> printer driver etc etc be intact after the upgrade, or will there
>
> typically be loads of "holes" everywhere, demanding a reinstallation
>
> of key packages, e.g. Visual Basic, Word, Excel etc.
>
>
>
> It's this reinstallation I'm desperate to avoid if at all possible.
>
> When I went from Win 98 to Win 2K, doing a clean install, the
>
> reinstallation of the apps took days, half of which was spent
>
> collating all the installation disks.
>
>
>
> By the way I will make a TrueImage backup image of the entire disk
>
> before starting the upgrade process.
>
>
>
> Thanks for any tips in this regard.
>
>
>
> MM

Dunno how helpful it would be, but there's a program out there called, "Ninite" (free), which seems to let you list a lot of apps for simple re-install after a rebuild. I don't need it so haven't read the howto, although I've come across several folk who swear by it. Or at it, not certain which, but it might be worth a look.

[John Williamson]

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/06/13 09:18, Eric wrote:
>> MM wrote ...
>>
>>
>>> Latest update: I gave up on upgrading and have installed XP on a clean
>>> drive. Reinstallation of all the software is taking forever, as I knew
>>> it would, but I'm retired so it's not like I don't have the time!
>>>
>>
>> No surprise. Why not install software as and when you need it or one a
>> day. Most of us have too many unused programs that only slow down those
>> we do need.
>>
> Unused programs merely use up disk space.
>

Not if they're like LibreOffice or Microsoft Office and install a
"Quickstart" feature that takes possession of a fair amount of RAM and
uses processor cycles to maintain its status. Or the program that came
with a new camera, which I need to read its RAW file format, but insists
on installing a tray icon to just hang around waiting for the moment I
connect the camera.

> Of course if there are programs that are being used, but are not doing
> anything useful, that's another matter. Windows itself may well be one
> such.
>

There are a lot of those, even under Linux.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Steve Firth]

MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]

> I have well over 100 books on programming (VB, C, C++ Assembler, ADO,
> SQL, MySQL, Sqlite etc etc), yet I never need to open any nowadays,

Because you are retired and out of date.

> since a quick Google gives me the answer immediately, often with
> sample code I can copy and paste. That ain't the case with Linux.
> Because it's installed on so few computers, there just isn't the
> wealth of experience as there is with Windows.

Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Please someone, make him stop, he's embarrassing himself.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Steve Firth]

MM <kyli...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

[Ubuntu]

> ... bunch of kids, wet behind the ears!

Running a business that makes more money than you can dream of, by giving
away a free operating system.

> Honestly, they have the world at their feet, given that the only other
> viable OS are Windows or Mac, and what have they achieved after 15
> years of buggering about?

Total dominance where it matters. Cheap computing for countries that can't
afford to pay Microsoft prices, a generation if young people growing up
with real skills in computing rather than as button pressing monkeys.

In the wider world it is Linux that dominates professional computing
whether it is Enterprise distributions or embedded Linux systems at the
heart of moving the data around, scanning it for malware, ensuring secure
file transfer or just erecting big "piss off spammer" signs on the
information super highway.

All your comment reveals is your amateurism and the profound depths of your
ignorance.

> Totally amateurish systems.

Back to Windows 8 are we? Or indeed any flavour of Windows.

> I expect they
> have meetings to discuss important stuff like whether to call it Saucy
> Salamander...

Yes it's already been established that "fun" is not a recognised commodity
in your world and that your computing skills are at some sort of nadir
since you can only cope with Windows, some broken version of Pascal and
being spoon-fed GUI elements by a big corporation.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Eric]

John Williamson wrote ...

>
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> > On 15/06/13 09:18, Eric wrote:
> >> MM wrote ...
> >>
> >>
> >>> Latest update: I gave up on upgrading and have installed XP on a clean
> >>> drive. Reinstallation of all the software is taking forever, as I knew
> >>> it would, but I'm retired so it's not like I don't have the time!
> >>>
> >>
> >> No surprise. Why not install software as and when you need it or one a
> >> day. Most of us have too many unused programs that only slow down those
> >> we do need.
> >>
> > Unused programs merely use up disk space.
> >
> Not if they're like LibreOffice or Microsoft Office and install a
> "Quickstart" feature that takes possession of a fair amount of RAM and
> uses processor cycles to maintain its status. Or the program that came
> with a new camera, which I need to read its RAW file format, but insists
> on installing a tray icon to just hang around waiting for the moment I
> connect the camera.

Worth installing
http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/what_run_in_startup.html

[Eric]

> Just *look* at those goalposts move!
>
> "Please, Miss, he did it first" wasn't an excuse in infant school and it
> isn't an excuse now.


He did it first - hasn't stopped and has made a fucking fortune out of
people who pay over the odds for their stuff.

No moving goal posts here. I've spent my life watching thieving
bastards get away time and time again. Some of the fuckers even get
knighted for it - viz Branson and those bastard bankers.

>
> > Course not, you're a fucking twat.
>

> That's as may be, but I'm not a thief and hypocrite.

Never nicked anything - ever? Never broken any law ?
Sorry chum, I don't believe you.