Quicken Backup (Part 2)
Don
because I did not make myself clear. So I want to start over again and just
ask a simple question.
I have one hard drive which is the C: drive. I have two external hard
drives which are K: drive and L: drive.
I CANNOT backup to any of these hard drives. And this time I am talking
about from having Quicken 2003 open and trying to backup from INSIDE the
program.
Am I supposed to be able to back up to a hard drive? You would think that I
could certainly backup to the C: hard drive, but I can't even do that. A
message pops up and says "Unable to access the disk in drive C: Please make
sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected." (of course
it's ready and it is not write-protected). The same message for Drives K:
and L:.
Okay that is the question. Now ... I have a floppy drive A:, I have an
Iomega Zip Drive J:, and I have an external N: drive which accommodates a
memory stick (a USB flash stick). I can backup to any of those. They all
have media ... a floppy disk, or a Zip disk, or a flash USB stick. Backing
up to those is not problem. So I repeat, should I be able to backup to a
hard drive?
When this issue is settled, then I have other questions.
Thanks,
Don
Bob Wang
If you have your 2003 install CD AND subsequent patches, you could always
try re-installing, or installing a newer version of Quicken and see if the
problem persists.
You can download trial versions of 2007 at Quicken.com.
Bob
>>>
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
news:CDTni.4627$SM6.4317@trnddc01...
John Pollard
> Am I supposed to be able to back up to a hard drive?
Yes.
How about some more information?
1.) What operating system?
2.) What is the fully qualified name of the file you are trying
to backup? [I assume you were trying to backup the same file
for all of your tests.]
3.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your failed
backups?
4.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your
successful backups?
--
John Pollard
First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com
Please reply to newsgroup
RICHARD GORDON
In addition to the additional info that John Pollard asked for are your two
external drives attached directly to your computer (and if so is it a USB
connection) or are they attached via a network connection ?
Richard Gordon
Don
--
:Don
"John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:GA1oi.16322$Xa3.5541@attbi_s22...
> Don wrote:
>> Am I supposed to be able to back up to a hard drive?
>
> Yes.
>
> How about some more information?
>
> 1.) What operating system? Windows Vista
> 2.) What is the fully qualified name of the file you are trying to backup?
> [I assume you were trying to backup the same file for all of your tests.]
> Qdata.QDF
> 3.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your failed backups?
> C:\
> 4.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your successful
> backups? J:\
Don
--
:Don
"RICHARD GORDON" <richard_...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:13a1ddd...@news.supernews.com...
My 2 external hard drives are connected via USB connection.
I can not back up to the computer's hard drive which is C:\
Everyone is telling me I should be able to backup to my hard drive C:, but I
get the error message every time: "Unable to access the disk in drive C:
Please
> make sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
>
> Richard Gordon
>
>
John Pollard
>> Don
> "John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:GA1oi.16322$Xa3.5541@attbi_s22...
>> Don wrote:
>>> Am I supposed to be able to back up to a hard drive?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> How about some more information?
>>
>> 1.) What operating system? Windows Vista
>
>> 2.) What is the fully qualified name of the file you are
>> trying to
>> backup? [I assume you were trying to backup the same file for
>> all of
>> your tests.] Qdata.QDF
>
>> 3.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your
>> failed
>> backups? C:\
>
>> 4.) What is the complete backup path name for one of your
>> successful
>> backups? J:\
What happens if you create a brand new folder under your C root
folder (C:\QBACK, for example), then try backing up to that
folder?
John Pollard
>> 2.) What is the fully qualified name of the file you are
>> trying to
>> backup? [I assume you were trying to backup the same file for
>> all of
>> your tests.] Qdata.QDF
Are you saying that your Qdata.QDF file is located in the root
folder of your hard drive? When I said "fully qualified name",
I meant the file name and path.
Don
--
:Don
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
news:vl3oi.3$9A6.1@trnddc01...
>
>
> --
> :Don
> "John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:GA1oi.16322$Xa3.5541@attbi_s22...
>> Don wrote:
>>> Am I supposed to be able to back up to a hard drive?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> How about some more information?
>>
>> 1.) What operating system? Windows Vista
>
>> 2.) What is the fully qualified name of the file you are trying to
>> backup? [I assume you were trying to backup the same file for all of your
>> tests.] Qdata.QDF
The complete path of the file I am backing up is:
C:\Program Files\Quicken\Qdata.QDF
My successful backups are made to J:\ (which is my Iomega Zip Drive)
My unsuccessful backups are attempted made to C:\
Also to my two external hard drives K:\ and L:\ (both unsuccessful and
both are external hard drives connected via USB port)
Jerry Boyle
> The complete path of the file I am backing up is:
> C:\Program Files\Quicken\Qdata.QDF
Have you tried to back up to C:\Documents\Quicken\Qdata.QDF?
This is a better place for your data files, especially with Windows Vista.
Jerry Boyle
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:Nf4oi.336610$p47....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
> news:my3oi.5$9A6.0@trnddc01...
>
>> The complete path of the file I am backing up is:
>> C:\Program Files\Quicken\Qdata.QDF
>
> Have you tried to back up to C:\Documents\Quicken\Qdata.QDF?
>
Oops, sorry - that's a good place for your working copy of Quicken data.
Make that a directory underneath C:\Documents, e.g. C:\Documents\Q03Backup.
If this doesn't work it should eliminate file access permissions as a cause
of your problem.
Don
Got the same error message. "Unable to access the disk in drive C: Please
sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
My Quicken 2003 is located at C:\Program Files\Quicken. My Qdata files are
located there also.
I have been reading my Backup help files in Quicken 2003. It indicates that
I can backup to an external floppy disk, a CD or DVD, a Zip Disk etc. Also
can backup with the online service. I don't think it allows backing up to a
hard drive.
Maybe I should copy/paste some of the help file here:
Back up my files
Quicken needs to know more about the task that you want to complete. After
you choose a task, Quicken displays more information following the list.
Which do you want to do? Choose one:
Back up my files to an external disk
Back up my files to the Web
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can back up your Quicken data to a variety of external sources
including CD-Rs or CD-RWs, Zip disks, SuperDisks, floppy disks, and so on.
If you subscribed to Quicken Online Backup, you can also back up your files
to the Web.
Back up my files to an external disk
It's important to have a backup copy of your data in case original data on
your hard disk drive is damaged or destroyed. You can back up to a variety
of external sources including CD-Rs or CD-RWs, Zip disks, SuperDisks, floppy
disks, and so on. Quicken regularly prompts you to back up your current file
when you exit the program. Intuit strongly recommends that you do so. In
addition, you can make a backup copy of your data at any time.
Before you can back up to CD-R or CD-RW, you must configure your CD-ROM
drive to work like an alternate hard disk drive. When you're done, you
should be able to copy files from your hard disk drive to a CD-R or CD-RW.
In addition, for many Operating Systems, you must install a third party
program to enable your computer to copy files from your hard disk drive to a
CD-R or CD-RW. You can find an example of this type of program on Quicken
Product Support. If you need additional assistance, refer to the
manufacturer's instructions that came with the CD-R or CD-RW drive, or
contact your computer or hardware manufacturer for more information about
using the applications that came with the CD-R or CD-RW drive.
Note
This procedure does not back up your Quicken Home Inventory data. For
information about backing up your Quicken Home Inventory data, choose
Property & Debt menu > Quicken Home Inventory. Then choose Help menu >
Contents, click Index, and enter "backing up your data."
1 Place a formatted disk in a drive. »
Intuit strongly recommends that you alternate between two disks or sets of
floppy disks instead of always backing up to the same one.
If the disk you are backing up to is not formatted for read/write access,
you'll receive an error message stating that the disk cannot be accessed.
For information about how to check file access settings, refer to Quicken
Product Support. If you need additional assistance, refer to the
manufacturer's instructions for your Operating System.
2 Choose File menu > Backup.
3 Under File to Back Up, make sure the file you want to back up is selected
(the current file is selected by default). If you want to back up a
different file, click Browse.
4 Under Backup Location, select the drive that contains the backup disk.
5 If the file is larger than the space available on the backup disk, Quicken
displays a warning message. Select the backup option you want, then replace
the backup disk with another disk and click OK. »
Storing other files on disks you use to back up your Quicken data can take
up a lot of room. You might be able to avoid using more disks than necessary
for your Quicken backups by storing only Quicken data on the backup disks.
6 When Quicken tells you that the backup is complete, click OK and remove
the backup disk. Store the disk or disks in a safe place.
7 To create a second backup copy, repeat steps 1 through 6.
Back up my files online with Quicken Online
The best way to safeguard your valuable Quicken data is to back it up every
day to a remote location. That's akin to storing important family documents
like wills or deeds in a safety deposit box in a bank. Should anything
happen to your computer-even if it's only your teenager deleting data from
your hard disk drive to make room for an MP3 download-you're protected.
But who has time to back up files every day?
Quicken, in partnership with Connected.com, is offering Quicken Online
Backup. With this service you back up your Quicken data online. You can even
schedule automatic backups.
If you haven't signed up yet
1 Choose File menu > Backup.
2 Under Back Up Location, select Online, and then click OK.
3 Follow the instructions on the Web page for signing up.
After you sign up
1 Choose File menu > Backup.
2 Under Back Up Location, click Online, and then click OK to start the
backup. »
When you perform your first backup, some versions of the software give you
the chance to specify the files and directories you want to back up. Click
the check boxes for the files you want.
These files will be backed up until you specify new files for back up in the
Quicken Online Backup window. To do so, click the Backup View tab, click
Explore to pick files in the left margin, navigate to the files you want to
change, and select or clear the check boxes next to them.
Important
Wait until the online backup is complete before resuming your Quicken
session. If you don't, it could interfere with the backup process.
If you must interrupt the backup, do so by clicking Cancel in the Backup
dialog box that displays the progress of your back up.
3 Close the Quicken Online Backup window by clicking the Close button [X] in
the upper-right corner when the back up is complete.
Note
If, for any reason you change computers, you need to reinstall Quicken
Online Backup. Go to www.connected.com\quicken\phone.htm, click Common
Questions, and follow the onscreen instructions for reinstalling.
--
:Don
"John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:it3oi.16388$Xa3.422@attbi_s22...
John Pollard
> OK. I created a folder at C:\Qbackups. Then tried to send a
> backup
> there. Got the same error message. "Unable to access the disk
> in
> drive C: Please make
> sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
>
> My Quicken 2003 is located at C:\Program Files\Quicken. My
> Qdata
> files are located there also.
>
> I have been reading my Backup help files in Quicken 2003. It
> indicates that I can backup to an external floppy disk, a CD
> or DVD,
> a Zip Disk etc. Also can backup with the online service. I
> don't
> think it allows backing up to a hard drive.
I have used every version of Quicken from Q2000 thru Q2007 ...
except Q2003. I have always successfully backed up to my hard
drive after every time I use Quicken.
So while it is possible that Q2003 *can't* backup to a hard
drive, I think it is very unlikely.
> Maybe I should copy/paste some of the help file here:
< snip >
I didn't attempt to read all the Help you posted, but it said
pretty much the same thing my Q2005 Help says about backup. And
Q2005 has no trouble backing up to my hard drive.
I tend to think you have a Vista access issue (though I do not
have Vista - others here can give you more help with Vista
specifics).
I would try moving/copying [using any means: Quicken "Copy";
Windows copy (QDATA.*); restore from your offline backup media;
etc.) my current Quicken data out of the "Program Files"
folder, to another new folder that you create. I do recall that
Quicken backups want to create a file when they run (Q3.dir);
perhaps Quicken is trying to create Q3.dir in your Program Files
folder and perhaps Vista will not let Quicken do that.
John Pollard
> I would try moving/copying [using any means: Quicken "Copy";
> Windows copy (QDATA.*); restore from your offline backup
> media;
> etc.) my current Quicken data out of the "Program Files"
> folder, to another new folder that you create. I do recall
> that
> Quicken backups want to create a file when they run (Q3.dir);
> perhaps Quicken is trying to create Q3.dir in your Program
> Files
> folder and perhaps Vista will not let Quicken do that.
You *might* be able to test my Vista access ("permissions"?)
theory by just running Quicken as "administrator", but again,
the Vista users can probably give you more insights into this
than I.
Don
I believe it must be a Vista issue. However, I have every intention of
checking this out more fully. At least, I know from you and others on this
board that I should be able to backup to a hard drive. So, I'll keep
trying.
Thanks to you very much for your concern and help.
Until you hear from me again, you'll know I'm testing the system, both Vista
and Quicken. My next attempt will be moving my Quicken data out of Program
Files as you suggested. I have a feeling that I will eventually get this
worked out.
--
:Don
"John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:_P5oi.33647$Fc.20450@attbi_s21...
John Pollard
> John,
>
> I believe it must be a Vista issue. However, I have every
> intention
> of checking this out more fully. At least, I know from you
> and
> others on this board that I should be able to backup to a hard
> drive.
> So, I'll keep trying.
>
> Thanks to you very much for your concern and help.
>
> Until you hear from me again, you'll know I'm testing the
> system,
> both Vista and Quicken. My next attempt will be moving my
> Quicken
> data out of Program Files as you suggested. I have a feeling
> that I
> will eventually get this worked out.
You could even have Quicken create a new data file (File > New >
New Quicken File) in a new folder, then try backing up that new
file.
John Pollard
> You could even have Quicken create a new data file (File > New
> >
> New Quicken File) in a new folder, then try backing up that
> new
> file.
Nuts, hit that Send button too quickly.
This suggestion is just to *test* the theory, it's not intended
as a solution.
Don
I AM REALLY PUZZLED ABOUT SOMETHING NOW. I deleted every Qdata.QDF file I
found, thinking I would create a new file and a new location then use my
restore from my Zip Drive. But with every Qdata.QDF file deleted, I still
had my data when I opened Quicken.
This really aggrevated me, so I uninstalled Quicken. Searched my hard drive
for every occurance of Qdata and deleted every file.
I made certain every file was gone but the Quicken directory was still there
so I deleted it.
I reinstalled Quicken 2003 from my CD. Everything went fine and the program
was installed. I then opened quicken, AND SURE ENOUGH THERE WAS ALL MY DATA
up to date.
So, where is this data coming from?
--
:Don
"John Pollard" <willnotw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f7r02l$feq$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
Han
news:CDTni.4627$SM6.4317@trnddc01:
Was there not a problem with some older Quicken versions insisting the
program was run from an administrator account?
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
Laura
> But that is a good suggestion.
>
> I AM REALLY PUZZLED ABOUT SOMETHING NOW. I deleted every Qdata.QDF file I
> found, thinking I would create a new file and a new location then use my
> restore from my Zip Drive. But with every Qdata.QDF file deleted, I still
> had my data when I opened Quicken.
>
> This really aggrevated me, so I uninstalled Quicken. Searched my hard
> drive for every occurance of Qdata and deleted every file.
>
> I made certain every file was gone but the Quicken directory was still
> there so I deleted it.
>
> I reinstalled Quicken 2003 from my CD. Everything went fine and the
> program was installed. I then opened quicken, AND SURE ENOUGH THERE WAS
> ALL MY DATA up to date.
>
> So, where is this data coming from?
Open up Quicken and select File. It should show you the last file that was
opened. This should give you the exact path location of the file.
As for your backups, Quicken automatically creates a folder called BACKUP in
the same folder that your data files are contained. You should be able to
see this default location by selecting File>>backup. I would try (one last
time) to backup your file to the default location on your hard drive.
John Pollard
> But that is a good suggestion.
>
> I AM REALLY PUZZLED ABOUT SOMETHING NOW. I deleted every
> Qdata.QDF
> file I found, thinking I would create a new file and a new
> location
> then use my restore from my Zip Drive. But with every
> Qdata.QDF file
> deleted, I still had my data when I opened Quicken.
Without trying to discuss that question - because you can test
the theory without knowing the answer - just create a New file
(in a new folder that you create as the same user running
Quicken), have that new file open, and tell Quicken to back it
up to that new backup folder. [You don't have to delete any
other files, to test this.]
Don
That helped considerably. It is picking up the data from my O: drive which
is a USB Memory stick connected to a 7-port hub. I had done a backup there.
I also did a backup on my J: drive which is the Zip Drive. I have plenty of
backups but they are all on removable media.
Since I reinstalled Quicken, I thought for sure I would be able to do a
backup to a hard drive. But NOT SO.
I created a directory C:\Quicken Test. Got the same message as before
"Unable to access the disk in drive C: Please make
sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
So then I tried to another hard drive (an external hard drive). I created a
directory at L:\Quicken Test\Test. Got the same message: Unable to access
the disk in drive L: Please make
sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
So it seems that I can only backup to a drive with removable media. I don't
understand why everybody else can backup to a hard drive and I can't. It
sure is puzzling.
--
:Don
"Laura" <inv...@sample.invalid> wrote in message
news:nxboi.338229$p47....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Don
the way I've been using for 14 years).
But, I've always backed up to a removable media. I have just now thought it
would be much better to backup to one of my external hard drives.
--
:Don
"Han" <nob...@nospam.not> wrote in message
news:Xns9973C3027...@199.45.49.11...
Don
download from your financial institution's web site ?
--
:Don
Andrew DeFaria
Laura,
That helped considerably. It is picking up the data from my O: drive which is a USB Memory stick connected to a 7-port hub.
I had done a backup there. I also did a backup on my J: drive which is the Zip Drive. I have plenty of backups but they are all on removable media.
Since I reinstalled Quicken, I thought for sure I would be able to do a backup to a hard drive. But NOT SO.
Let's start from the top, and proceed down every folder in the path you are trying to write to. Go to C: in Explorer. Right click on that and select Properties. Then click on the Security tab. What does it say? List out each group of user name and note the permissions for each one of them. Do you have permissions to write to that drive? I believe Vista has this: Click on Advanced and then Effective Permissions then on the Select button and type in your log in name then OK. This should give you a list of what effective permission you have at this level (currently the drive level). Do you have write permission?
Continue down the hierarchy (if any) selecting subsequent folders and permissions. What you're trying to verify is that you can indeed write to that area. If you can't then that's what Quicken's complaining about.
Also try this: In Quicken select File: File Operations: Copy then attempt to copy your current opened Quicken data file to whatever path you are trying to write the backup to. If you can copy the Quicken data file interactively then the Quicken Backup file should also work. Essentially this is coming down to a permissions problem
I created a directory C:\Quicken Test. Got the same message as before "Unable to access the disk in drive C: Please make sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
So then I tried to another hard drive (an external hard drive). I created a directory at L:\Quicken Test\Test. Got the same message: Unable to access the disk in drive L: Please make
sure the drive is ready and the disk is not write protected."
So it seems that I can only backup to a drive with removable media. I don't understand why everybody else can backup to a hard drive and I can't. It sure is puzzling.
BTW: What user are you running as?
Jerry Boyle
I'm not sure you intended to address this to me, but I'll take a shot at it.
It looks like you have an access permission problem, both here and with your
backup issue.
There's a table in Windows that relates file type (e.g. ".qdf") to the
default program that should be used to process that file type.
I think that Web Connect files are type ".qfx".
When you uninstalled Quicken you probably deleted the Web Connect entry from
the above table. Now, each time Quicken starts, it's detecting that the
entry is missing and prompting you to add it back. However, this is a system
table and you need administrator privileges to modify it (which you or the
Quicken program probably don't have). So it looks like the table update is
failing and that's why you keep getting the same prompt each time you open
Quicken.
I'm brand new to Vista so take the following with a grain of salt.
The way I think you should handle Quicken under Vista is to install and run
it under the same administrative account. Under Vista there is a mechanism
called User Account Control (UAC). If UAC is enabled, and it should be, each
time a program with administrative privileges tries to modify a system table
Vista throws up a prompt screen asking you for permission to continue. In
your "Web Connect" case you would give that permission, Vista would allow
Quicken to update file type-default program association table and you'd
never see the prompt again.
That's the way I think things "should" work. Unfortunately I'm not enough of
an expert to deduce what's happening on your system or tell you how to
correct it.
As an aside, let me speculate on why you can backup to removable devices and
not to your hard drives. It may have to do with the type of file system. I
suspect that your removable devices are formatted as FAT or FAT32 while your
hard drives are formatted as NTFS. NTFS has security control while FAT and
FAT32 don't. For example, I have two external hard drives connected via USB.
One is formatted NTFS and it has the Security tab that Andrew DeFaria tells
you about in his post; the other is formatted FAT32 and has no Security tab.
Sorry that I can't pinpoint your exact problem, but I hope the above helps.
Jerry
P.S. I had a heckuva time locating the file type association program in
Vista. I finally found it under Control Panel -> Programs -> Default
Programs -> "Make a file type always open a specific program". There's
probably an easier way to get to it.
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
news:gscoi.61$Da.20@trnddc07...
Don
"Then click on the Security tab. What does it say?"
Here is what it says:
Group or user names:
Authenticated Users
SYSTEM
Administrators (Don-PC\Administrators)
Users (Don-PC\Users)
Okay. I am the only person in his house. I am the only one who uses this
computer. So, which one do I change? Do I delete all of them except one?
I am the administrator and when I first got the computer a couple weeks ago
I named the computer "Don-PC".
So maybe one step at a time. Can you answer if I should allow "full
control" to every group listed here or if I should delete all but one entry?
I guess I got ahead of myself and I tried to allow full control to all of
them.
Again, I am the only person who uses this computer.
--
:Don
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message
news:46a17d3a$0$502$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle
John made an interesting observation here, namely that the problem might be
an auxiliary file such as Q3.dir that Q2003 doesn't have permission to
create.
You might want to check to see if Q2003 put Q3.dir on one of your removable
drives when you made your backup. If so, that may be a clue to where it's
trying and failing to put Q3.dir on your hard drives.
Jerry
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
news:5i6oi.27$9A6.23@trnddc01...
Don
--
:Don
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a17d3a$0$502$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Don
I uninstalled Quicken again and then reinstalled. That took care of the
problem. It does not pop up a screen asking about Web Connect. All is
working fine now.
Thanks.
--
:Don
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:NUloi.342701$p47.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Jerry Boyle
>
> I'm brand new to Vista so take the following with a grain of salt.
>
> The way I think you should handle Quicken under Vista is to install and
> run
> it under the same administrative account. Under Vista there is a mechanism
> called User Account Control (UAC). If UAC is enabled, and it should be,
> each
> time a program with administrative privileges tries to modify a system
> table
> Vista throws up a prompt screen asking you for permission to continue. In
> your "Web Connect" case you would give that permission, Vista would allow
> Quicken to update file type-default program association table and you'd
> never see the prompt again.
Don,
I think I'm beginning to see what's going on with this Vista UAC stuff.
When you add a user account you get 2 user IDs, one with standard privileges
and one with administrative privileges, both associated with the same logon.
When you log on you get the permissions of the standard user. If you try to
do something for which you (or the program you're executing) don't have
permission, you get dynamically upgraded to the permissions of the
administrative user for the duration of the task at hand. Whether or not you
get a prompt before this "upgrade" takes place depends on whether UAC is
turned on (prompt) or off (no prompt) for the current user account.
In your case it looks like neither your standard nor administrative user ID
has the necessary permissions to (a) add the Web Connect file type
association or (b) create or update whatever item, perhaps file Q3.dir, it
requires for its backup.
You can try to set all your permissions properly for Quicken in the Vista
environment, but I think it's hopeless or at least unwise. I think only the
Quicken installation programs (for versions of Quicken that support Vista)
know exactly what permissions are required, and for what files and
directories, for both your standard and administrative user IDs. This is not
an easy task; Quicken Online Backup, which I used until I upgraded to Vista,
still isn't supported for Vista.
I suggest you upgrade to a more recent Quicken version. I have Q2006 H&B on
Vista and have no problem backing up to my NTFS hard drive. You can probably
get Q2006 pretty cheap on eBay.
Learning to live with or laboriously patch the type of annoyances you're
currently encountering is another option.
HTH
Jerry
Jerry Boyle
> Jerry,
>
> I uninstalled Quicken again and then reinstalled. That took care of the
> problem. It does not pop up a screen asking about Web Connect. All is
> working fine now.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> :Don
Just curious, what did you do differently?
- tinker with access privileges?
- remember to run Quicken Online Update after you reinstalled?
- repeat-and-pray-harder method?
Do your backups to hard drive now work?
Don
Thanks for your input. Everything is working fine now. I gave myself
permission to write to my external hard drives as suggested by Andrew
DeFaria and now I can backup to those external hard drives. So far,
everything is working fine. NOW, if there just was a way to stop all those
pop-up screens to "ALLOW" myself to do various tasks. !!!! Maybe someone
on here has some inside information about that.
Thanks again.
--
:Don
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:Hipoi.345008$p47....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
John Pollard
> I gave myself
> permission to write to my external hard drives as suggested by
> Andrew
> DeFaria and now I can backup to those external hard drives.
How about your internal hard drive?
Don
any backups there anyhow. I only backup to external hard drives in the
event the internal hard drive would become defective. Ha. I "did" give
myself permission to write there (C:) but I didn't want to mess up anything
to test a backup to drive C: and get unwanted files there that I don't
really want. Everything is working the way I wanted it so I am happy now
except for all those "ALLOW" screens that I must approve myself to do
different tasks. I live alone and I am the only one here so it is silly to
have to approve myself to do anything that I'm doing or to "ALLOW" myself to
do any job I want to do. I hope Microsoft took into account that there are
a lot of single people using their operating systems.
--
:Don
"John Pollard" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:_7qoi.34609$Fc.1843@attbi_s21...
Andrew DeFaria
Hi Andrew,
"Then click on the Security tab. What does it say?"
Here is what it says:
Group or user names:
Authenticated Users
SYSTEM
Administrators (Don-PC\Administrators)
Users (Don-PC\Users)
Okay. I am the only person in his house.
I am the only one who uses this computer.
So, which one do I change? Do I delete all of them except one? I am the administrator and when I first got the computer a couple weeks ago I named the computer "Don-PC".
So maybe one step at a time. Can you answer if I should allow "full control" to every group listed here or if I should delete all but one entry?
I guess I got ahead of myself and I tried to allow full control to all of them.
Again, I am the only person who uses this computer.
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew,That did the trick. After I gave myself permission to "write" to my external hard drive I was able to backup my Quicken files to that location. What a relief.Many thanks.
The answers are simple when you look at the problem logically...
Andrew DeFaria
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message news:Xapoi.399$Ub7.185@trnddc04...
Jerry,
I uninstalled Quicken again and then reinstalled. That took care of the problem. It does not pop up a screen asking about Web Connect. All is working fine now.
Thanks.
Just curious, what did you do differently?
- tinker with access privileges?
- remember to run Quicken Online Update after you reinstalled?
- repeat-and-pray-harder method?
Do your backups to hard drive now work?
Somewhere along the line this web connect association got deleted and Quicken, running as Don's unprivileged user, wants to fix the problem but can't.
Now Don reinstalls Quicken, probably as Admin, and the web connect association is correctly set up.
Andrew DeFaria
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:NUloi.342701$p47.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
I'm brand new to Vista so take the following with a grain of salt.Don,
The way I think you should handle Quicken under Vista is to install and run it under the same administrative account. Under Vista there is a mechanism called User Account Control (UAC). If UAC is enabled, and it should be, each time a program with administrative privileges tries to modify a system table Vista throws up a prompt screen asking you for permission to continue. In your "Web Connect" case you would give that permission, Vista would allow Quicken to update file type-default program association table and you'd never see the prompt again.
I think I'm beginning to see what's going on with this Vista UAC stuff.
When you add a user account you get 2 user IDs, one with standard privileges and one with administrative privileges, both associated with the same logon.
When you log on you get the permissions of the standard user. If you try to do something for which you (or the program you're executing) don't have permission, you get dynamically upgraded to the permissions of the administrative user for the duration of the task at hand.
Whether or not you get a prompt before this "upgrade" takes place depends on whether UAC is turned on (prompt) or off (no prompt) for the current user account.
In your case it looks like neither your standard nor administrative user ID has the necessary permissions to (a) add the Web Connect file type association or (b) create or update whatever item, perhaps file Q3.dir, it requires for its backup.
You can try to set all your permissions properly for Quicken in the Vista environment, but I think it's hopeless or at least unwise. I think only the Quicken installation programs (for versions of Quicken that support Vista) know exactly what permissions are required, and for what files and directories, for both your standard and administrative user IDs. This is not an easy task; Quicken Online Backup, which I used until I upgraded to Vista, still isn't supported for Vista.
I suggest you upgrade to a more recent Quicken version. I have Q2006 H&B on Vista and have no problem backing up to my NTFS hard drive. You can probably get Q2006 pretty cheap on eBay.
Learning to live with or laboriously patch the type of annoyances you're currently encountering is another option.
Andrew DeFaria
In love the paradox occurs that two beings become one and yet remain two. - Erich Fromm
Don
--
:Don
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a2542b$0$490$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Andrew DeFaria
Jerry,
Thanks for your input. Everything is working fine now. I gave myself permission to write to my external hard drives as suggested by Andrew DeFaria and now I can backup to those external hard drives. So far, everything is working fine. NOW, if there just was a way to stop all those pop-up screens to "ALLOW" myself to do various tasks. !!!! Maybe someone on here has some inside information about that.
Meantime, you might wish to check out Steve Gibson, of Gibson Research Corporation producing Spin Right and Shields Up, who does a podcast with Leo Laporte called Security Now. I listen to this regularly. Not really trying to plug Spin Right or anything but I do enjoy Steve's approach to things and laborious and thorough explanations. And hell you gotta admire anybody who writes all of his stuff in 100% assembly!
In any event episode #83 is entitled UAC in Depth in which he talks about UAC controls in Vista. From the Security Now page here are some links:
Episode #83 | 15 Mar 2007 | 50 min.
UAC in Depth
Leo and I wrap up our quest to get Windows Wi-Fi to 'Maintain Full Radio Silence' by adding one additional important tweak to Windows settings. Then we discuss the detailed security implications, now and in the future, of Vista�s new and powerful user account control (UAC) system.24 MB
6.1 MB
3.4 KB
81 KB
43 KB
101 KB
Andrew DeFaria
Sorry. I was just trying to make a point that I am the only one using this computer and so the Administrator and the user are all the same person, as well as the Authenticated User.After a lot of thought I chose "Users" and gave myself permission to write to the external hard drives. It worked and my thanks to you.
Just letting you know...
Don
--
:Don
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a25f71$0$496$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew,When I sign on, I am "Don-Administrator". Maybe you can tell me something else that is really bugging me.I purchased and downloaded (this year) Quicken Medical Expense Manager which I use for all medical expenditures.
I did put up a page, subject to relocation, at http://defaria.com/medical.html. Mr. Weaver said that this was the 1st of 3 articles but has never given me #2 and #3. Oh well..
All my other programs open ordinarily, i.e. Quicken Financial, etc. But when I open QMEM, a UAC screen opens with the following:"An unidentified program wants access to your computer".I have to click on "Allow - I trust this program. I know where it's from or I've used it before".Is there a way to stop this screen from prompting me to "allow" the program to run?
Jerry Boyle
> Jerry,
>
> Thanks for your input. Everything is working fine now. I gave myself
> permission to write to my external hard drives as suggested by Andrew
> DeFaria and now I can backup to those external hard drives. So far,
> everything is working fine. NOW, if there just was a way to stop all
> those pop-up screens to "ALLOW" myself to do various tasks. !!!! Maybe
> someone on here has some inside information about that.
>
Here's how you turn off UAC and all those prompts, but I thinks it's very
unwise to do so:
Control Panel ->
User Accounts and Family Safety ->
User Accounts ->
Turn User Account Control on of off ->
<ALLOW yourself by clicking "Continue" :-) :-) ->
uncheck "Use User Account Control (UAC) to help protect your computer" and
click OK
The purpose of UAC is to prevent your "user account" from performing
potentially dangerous operations without your explicit permission. If a
virus infects your computer it can wreak havoc by damaging critical system
files and resources while running in the background using your "user
account" permissions. But with UAC turned on you can see the prompt,
recognize that you didn't start a privileged operation, deny the operation
and then take steps to disinfect your computer.
If you want to give up this protection, I've shown you how.
Glad you got things working. Andrew amazes me at how quickly he got to the
heart of this problem.
Jerry
Andrew DeFaria
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message news:Mwpoi.3363$U47.2663@trnddc08...
Jerry,Here's how you turn off UAC and all those prompts, but I thinks it's very unwise to do so:
Thanks for your input. Everything is working fine now. I gave myself permission to write to my external hard drives as suggested by Andrew DeFaria and now I can backup to those external hard drives. So far, everything is working fine. NOW, if there just was a way to stop all those pop-up screens to "ALLOW" myself to do various tasks. !!!! Maybe someone on here has some inside information about that.
Control Panel ->
User Accounts and Family Safety ->
User Accounts ->
Turn User Account Control on of off ->
<ALLOW yourself by clicking "Continue" :-) :-) ->
uncheck "Use User Account Control (UAC) to help protect your computer" and click OK
The purpose of UAC is to prevent your "user account" from performing potentially dangerous operations without your explicit permission. If a virus infects your computer it can wreak havoc by damaging critical system files and resources while running in the background using your "user account" permissions. But with UAC turned on you can see the prompt, recognize that you didn't start a privileged operation, deny the operation and then take steps to disinfect your computer.
By and large I'm convinced that a lot of viruses are figments of the users imagination in that something else happened and the user is too confused to know what it is so he claims it's a virus. For example, this little problem here could have easily been classified as a virus but luckily hasn't been.
This is not to say that viruses do not exist. They do. However the UAC stuff that MS has put in is probably stupid (I say properly because I'm not running Vista or UAC). At work they attempt to limit what you can do to the PC for the same reasons - concerns about viruses and the like. It's such that I cannot, for example, defrag my disk drive because I'm not admin. Hmmm... How exactly is that a security violation?
If you want to give up this protection, I've shown you how.
Glad you got things working. Andrew amazes me at how quickly he got to the heart of this problem.
Seriously though, 25 years in the business helps I guess....
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message
> Jerry Boyle wrote:
>> I think I'm beginning to see what's going on with this Vista UAC stuff.
>>
>> When you add a user account you get 2 user IDs, one with standard
>> privileges and one with administrative privileges, both associated
>> with the same logon.
> I highly doubt that. When you install Vista an Administrator user is
> created. This is the same as the root user in Unix terms. You also
> create a non administrative user that you normally log in as (Let's
> assume Don's regular, non administrative user is named... well... Don).
I think you're right.
It looks like the difference between regular users and administrative users
is that only the latter are members of the Administrators "group" (UNIX
terminology).
With UAC turned off they get Administrators group permissions, whenever
needed, without a prompt.
With UAC turned on they get a prompt that allows them to deny access to
Administrators group permissions.
I don't think Vista administrators are equivalent to the UNIX root user. My
Vista login has "Administrators" privileges, but not "SYSTEM" privileges. A
UNIX root user can do anything - including installing a virus under your
login :-)
Andrew DeFaria
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a258dc$0$490$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle wrote:I think you're right.
I think I'm beginning to see what's going on with this Vista UAC stuff.I highly doubt that. When you install Vista an Administrator user is created. This is the same as the root user in Unix terms. You also create a non administrative user that you normally log in as (Let's assume Don's regular, non administrative user is named... well... Don).
When you add a user account you get 2 user IDs, one with standard privileges and one with administrative privileges, both associated with the same logon.
It looks like the difference between regular users and administrative users is that only the latter are members of the Administrators "group" (UNIX terminology).
With UAC turned off they get Administrators group permissions, whenever needed, without a prompt.
With UAC turned on they get a prompt that allows them to deny access to Administrators group permissions.
If they are in the administrators group then I think Vista's UAC on will prompt while UAC off will not prompt.
I don't think Vista administrators are equivalent to the UNIX root user. My Vista login has "Administrators" privileges, but not "SYSTEM" privileges. A UNIX root user can do anything - including installing a virus under your login :-)
Don
want to turn it off. I think it's a pretty good idea to pop up a screen if
it's going to prevent a program from running that I did not originate or
want to run. I can learn to live with those pop ups as they don't really
happen that often.
I'm not really too concerned about getting a virus. Like Andrew, I have not
had a problem with any viruses in my 17 years of personal computing. They
have gotten into my computer, but I've always had a good virus program to
catch them before doing any harm. I am presently using AVG Pro and have
been using it for about 5 years. I started out with their Free program, but
now pay for their excellent service.
I am still reading and LEARNING about Vista. It's going to take a while to
understand it (maybe never) ha.
The important thing is THAT I GOT MY QUICKEN BACKUPS working. My Quicken
data file goes all the way back to 1993. I probably should archive a lot of
that data, but it's nice to have that much data when I want to find (and get
a history) of certain expenditures. I'm a great one for keeping records of
things that are important to me. Before Quicken I used a checking program
that wasn't as popular as Quicken. As of 6 months ago I am using Quicken
Medical Expense Manager. I kept most of my medical expense data in Excel
and in Access database. But I'm hoping Quicken can do a better job.
I keep a history of important information which includes every purchase and
for years I have kept every transaction on my MasterCard and VISA account.
I keep this in an Excel file. So now that I am charging purchases with my
VISA card, sometimes I have to search Quicken (for purchases paid by check)
and my Excel file for charged purchases. My data file goes back to 1990 and
I backup that data file every night onto an external hard drive and a
monthly backup to another hard drive (2 separate hard drives) K: and L:
Anyhow, backups are very important to me and I'm happy and grateful to all
of you on this board who have offered their time and expertise in getting my
Quicken backups to my external hard drives. I have backups to all 3 hard
drives and if one would become defective, I've got my data backed up on
another hard drive.
I've used news groups before, but am very surprised to find so many
knowledgeable people on this one. I used to belong to Prodigy and they had
their own bulletin boards with knowledgeable moderators. It was WONDERFUL.
Too bad there isn't something like that now. That's why I said I was so
surprised to find so much help here. It's almost like the good ol days of
Prodigy.
Thank you all very much.
Don Crislip
Vienna, West Virginia
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a3ba4b$0$500$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle wrote:
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a258dc$0$490$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle wrote:I think you're right.
I think I'm beginning to see what's going on with this Vista UAC stuff.I highly doubt that. When you install Vista an Administrator user is created. This is the same as the root user in Unix terms. You also create a non administrative user that you normally log in as (Let's assume Don's regular, non administrative user is named... well... Don).
When you add a user account you get 2 user IDs, one with standard privileges and one with administrative privileges, both associated with the same logon.
It looks like the difference between regular users and administrative users is that only the latter are members of the Administrators "group" (UNIX terminology).Not really. Windows uses the term "group" too. There are local groups and global groups.
I didn't know the Windows term so I used the UNIX term with which I was familiar and that I knew you would understand too.
With UAC turned off they get Administrators group permissions, whenever needed, without a prompt.
With UAC turned on they get a prompt that allows them to deny access to Administrators group permissions.If they do not have administrator group privileges (i.e. a plain Jane user), then I don't believe that UAC grants them such privileges. I believe you'd need to actually do RunAs. (Unix equivalents: su or sudo).
I never meant to imply that UAC would ever grant you permission for any groups to which you didn't belong. We agree.
If they are in the administrators group then I think Vista's UAC on will prompt while UAC off will not prompt.
That's exactly what I originally said, so I guess we agree here too.
I don't think Vista administrators are equivalent to the UNIX root user. My Vista login has "Administrators" privileges, but not "SYSTEM" privileges. A UNIX root user can do anything - including installing a virus under your login :-)As well as restore your files or install an application that is really worth your while, etc. Root user's are not inherently bad (as I am often running as root and I have, very often, saved many people's butts doing so).
I wasn't making a negative comment about root privileges. I was just jokingly referring to your haughty comment that you had never had a virus. The implication was that if I were a root user on your system, and you pissed me off, your record of never having had a virus might be finito. I realize, of course, that retaliation would be swift and severe.
Andrew DeFaria
I wasn't making a negative comment about root privileges. I was just jokingly referring to your haughty comment that you had never had a virus. The implication was that if I were a root user on your system,
and you pissed me off, your record of never having had a virus might be finito. I realize, of course, that retaliation would be swift and severe.
BTW: Why is
so horrible at handling quoted material? Just trying to be like crappy Outlook? ;-)X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480
Andrew DeFaria
Today I dialed a wrong number....The other side said, "Hello?" and I said, "Hello, could I speak to Joey?" They said," Uh, I don't think so...He's only two months old." I said, "I'll wait..."
Jerry Boyle
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a40109$0$505$815e...@news.qwest.net...
BTW: Why is
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480so horrible at handling quoted material? Just trying to be like crappy Outlook? ;-)
After looking at that huge bold type I see what you were complaining about. It makes even responding in all caps look polite.Is this better?
Laura
the message plus a ">". That makes it easier to read too.
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:Qq2pi.9854$iX3....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Andrew DeFaria
How about both of you using plain text instead of HTML and specify indenting the message plus a ">". That makes it easier to read too.
Andrew DeFaria
I tried to backup my hard drive but I couldn't figure out how to put it in reverse
Andrew DeFaria
As best I can tell, Windows Mail is simply Outlook Express with a new name.
The mess that I made of my reply to your post is probably more a product of my ignorance of how to handle your posting format than it is the fault of Windows Mail.
If I respond in plain text I get chopped lines and insufficient indentation.If I "Reply to messages using the format in which they were sent" my interspersed comments are impossible to see unless I force a larger font size.
Do you know a way to format my replies to you more nicely using Windows Mail?
I see a little HTML in newsgroups and in my private email, but not enough to warrant taking the time to install and learn to use a decent mail handler.
I do own Agent, which you probably also despise,
but I've only used it for downloading large binaries and haven't set it up on my new computer yet.
Jerry Boyle
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
I always post in plain text and reply to plain text posts in plain text.
Deciding how to reply to HTML posts has always been a problem for me.
In addition, I usually bottom post my replies or intersperse my comments.
However, if others in a thread are top-posting, then I also top-post. If a
thread contains both top and bottom posts, I usually top-post so that my
reply can be seen above the hopeless clutter below.
If I reply to some of Andrew's posts in plain text with Windows Mail, it
makes an absolute mess of things, especially if I want to intersperse
comments.
Surely you know that trying to get Andrew to change is hopeless. If he were
sitting on God's throne and God asked him to get up, I doubt that he would
budge :-)
Given that constraint I'd like to make my replies to him as readable as
possible. He has a lot to contribute. I know I've learned a lot from him
and, for me at least, it's worth trying to accommodate him as best I can.
Jerry
P.S. If you can convince Andrew to change I'll buy both of you a steak
dinner!
"Laura" <inv...@sample.invalid> wrote in message
news:IY2pi.361866$p47.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a4c568$0$505$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle wrote:I see a little HTML in newsgroups and in my private email, but not enough to warrant taking the time to install and learn to use a decent mail handler.You had to install Windows Mail (even if it came with Vista - you did install Vista didn't you?) and you've taken the time to learn to use a non-decent mail handler....
Nope. My old computer gave up the ghost and new PCs come with Vista and Windows Mail. I didn't have to learn Windows Mail - it's essentially identical to OE, even its user interface. I agree - it is a POS.I didn't want to have to learn Vista either. All they did was move things around so you can't find them anymore and provide extra security protection that even I, Windows idiot that I am, don't need.
I do own Agent, which you probably also despise,I don't despise Agent - I just haven't seen the need to install it. Thunderbird does NNTP and I'm happy enough with it. I do despise the concept of ownership, which implies purchase, especially when there are tons of freeware and open source software that quite often do the job better. Aside from being a cheap ass, I just hate it when you spend good money on something and then have to continue to spend, spend, spend while getting crappy support... Hmmm... Sorta sounds like Quicken... Well it is. I've looked into Gnucash, again, recently and it still doesn't do a good enough job WRT online banking.
but I've only used it for downloading large binaries and haven't set it up on my new computer yet.There are a number of better ways to get large binaries than using NNTP and piecing together parts to hopefully reassemble the whole. Bittorrents and various P2P networks. I know. Look at my server! I have a lot of media.
Not a problem for the few binaries I deal with. And Agent 4.2 supports NZB files, which piece together all the parts for you. I do wish I knew how to use bittorrents but for the volume I deal with it's not worth the trouble to learn how. I've never had a very good memory and I've reached the point in life where, for every new useful thing I learn, I forget at least two other useful things that I previously knew. So I have to ration my age- and alcohol-depleted supply of brain cells.
Don
XS11E
> As best I can tell, Windows Mail is simply Outlook Express with a
> new name.
It has some changes and improvements, one being that it doesn't try to
force top posting as OE did.
You can also turn off HTML before posting to newsgroups the same as you
could in OE, by clicking on Tools/Options and select the "Send" tab,
check Plain Text for News sending format.
Doing so would be much appreciated, thanks!
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
XS11E
> Laura wrote:
>> How about both of you using plain text instead of HTML and
>> specify indenting the message plus a ">". That makes it easier to
>> read too.
> How about you STFU? Or perhaps get some decent news reading
> software.
Errr... her newsreading software is configured correctly, yours is not.
See my previous reply.
Laura
it to be your default e-mail or newsreader program. Plus, don't have it
import your mail until you feel ready to make the switch permenant. I have
used TB but I don't like the way it handles HTML mail so I switched back to
OE. TB also does not have a combine and decode function so if you frequently
need to combine multipart messages then you are out of luck using TB.
Just make sure that youre newsreader is set to plain text to avoid the HTML
issue we are currently experiancing.
"Don" <don....@supportverizon.net> wrote in message
news:Hq5pi.1719$9A6.271@trnddc01...
Andrew DeFaria
Surely you know that trying to get Andrew to change is hopeless. If he were sitting on God's throne and God asked him to get up, I doubt that he would budge :-)
P.S. If you can convince Andrew to change I'll buy both of you a steak dinner!
And no, that's not happening either...
Andrew DeFaria
Anytime four New Yorkers get into a cab together without arguing, a bank robbery has just taken place.
Andrew DeFaria
Nope. My old computer gave up the ghost and new PCs come with Vista and Windows Mail.
I didn't have to learn Windows Mail - it's essentially identical to OE, even its user interface. I agree - it is a POS.
There are a number of better ways to get large binaries than using NNTP and piecing together parts to hopefully reassemble the whole. Bittorrents and various P2P networks. I know. Look at my server! I have a lot of media.Not a problem for the few binaries I deal with.
And Agent 4.2 supports NZB files, which piece together all the parts for you. I do wish I knew how to use bittorrents but for the volume I deal with it's not worth the trouble to learn how.
I've never had a very good memory and I've reached the point in life where, for every new useful thing I learn, I forget at least two other useful things that I previously knew. So I have to ration my age- and alcohol-depleted supply of brain cells.
--
Andrew DeFaria
Did anyone see my lost carrier?
Andrew DeFaria
Meantime feel free to email me personally and I will help you. Note: You'll have to register to email me but it's pretty easy.
Now where else do you get an offer like that!
Andrew DeFaria
You can use Thunderbird without messing up your WM settings. Just don't tell it to be your default e-mail or newsreader program. Plus, don't have it import your mail until you feel ready to make the switch permenant. I have used TB but I don't like the way it handles HTML mail so I switched back to OE.
LeGrand, Christina wrote:
The proper way to "prevent" such things is to use the proper way to do such things. To do this one should follow the standards and then validate (as Regan said to Gorbachev "Trust but verify").Larry, thanks for the great feedback! I have made the last three changes listed here - to the wording in the "Just the FAQs" section, the "ITS in the Customer Success Story, and the URL in the LDM docs section. Great catches! For the first two suggestions, all secondary titles are Arial 11, so I am not sure why they look different in your Outlook, but I believe you that they do. If anyone knows of how to prevent this, please let me know!
HTML headers should be done with the "H" tags of which there are H1 - H6. IOW one should not be putting any kinds of font information such as Arial nor point size in there. Such presentation information is best left to the eventual reader, who may not have the font you've chosen nor want Wingbats in Pink at 24 point!
However if you must code in a layout that's what CSS is for.
In any event Word, which this was made with, is an absolutely horrible HTML editor! And I shall now show you some of the reasons why. I hope you'll enjoy this ride as much as I will...
First off MS Word created HTML pages contain a lot of bloat. What Word does is include styling information at the beginning of the document to cover MS Word "styles" then applies "styles" to the layout. This is done, AFAICT, to attempt to get the web page to look "just like it did in Word". In a sentence - It's bad web design and bloat to your web pages let alone often non-standard and should be avoided at all costs.
Here is the beginning bloat:
Now wasn't that fun? :-)<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" = xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" = xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"> <meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document> <meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <link rel=3DFile-List href=3D"cid:fileli...@01C78350.D624B260"> <link rel=3DEdit-Time-Data href=3D"cid:editdata.mso"> <!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}</style> <![endif]--><o:SmartTagType namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" = name=3D"City"/> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name=3D"PlaceType"/> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name=3D"PlaceName"/> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name=3D"place"/> <o:SmartTagType = namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name=3D"PersonName"/> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:DoNotRelyOnCSS/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState> <w:DocumentKind>DocumentEmail</w:DocumentKind> <w:EnvelopeVis/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState=3D"false" LatentStyleCount=3D"156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--> <style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4; mso-font-alt:Verdana; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:1627421319 -2147483648 8 0 66047 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} p.newslettertitle, li.newslettertitle, div.newslettertitle {mso-style-name:newslettertitle; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} p.newslettertext, li.newslettertext, div.newslettertext {mso-style-name:newslettertext; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} p.newsletterheading, li.newsletterheading, div.newsletterheading {mso-style-name:newsletterheading; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} p.newsletterbullet, li.newsletterbullet, div.newsletterbullet {mso-style-name:newsletterbullet; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:black;} span.EmailStyle22 {mso-style-type:personal; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;} span.EmailStyle23 {mso-style-type:personal; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; color:navy;} span.EmailStyle24 {mso-style-type:personal; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; color:navy;} span.EmailStyle27 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial; mso-ascii-font-family:Arial; mso-hansi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; color:navy;} span.SpellE {mso-style-name:""; mso-spl-e:yes;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> <!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */=20 table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}</style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" /> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit"> <o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" /> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> </head>
After creating all that crud we are now able to apply it to our content. Here's the part that does the heading:
<p class=3Dnewsletterheading =OK, not you tell me - where's the Arial 11 point in there?
style=3D'mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:
0in;margin-bottom:4.0pt;margin-left:0in'><span =
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK1'><span
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK10'><span =
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK11'><span
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK12'><span =
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK2'><span
style=3D'mso-bookmark:OLE_LINK3'><strong><b><font size=3D3 =
color=3Dblack
face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-style:
italic'>DesignSync Documentation Has Moved</span></font><span
=
style=3D'mso-bidi-font-style:italic'><o:p></o:p></span></b></strong></spa=
n></span></span></span></span></span></p>
I'm sure you've enjoyed the above exercise...
Oh, and how does this look in "straight" HTML?
<h2>DesignSync Documentation Has Moved</h2>
TB also does not have a combine and decode function so if you frequently need to combine multipart messages then you are out of luck using TB.
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew DeFaria <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote:
Laura wrote:
How about both of you using plain text instead of HTML and specify indenting the message plus a ">". That makes it easier to read too.
How about you STFU? Or perhaps get some decent news reading software.Errr... her newsreading software is configured correctly, yours is not.
See my previous reply.Why?
XS11E
>>>> configured correctly, yours is not.
> That's a matter of opinion and you know what they say about
> opinions...
It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of proper etiquitte or, if
you prefer, courtesy to others in the newsgroup. Newsgroup etiquitte
is well established and has been for many years.
> See my previous reply. Why?
The biggest reason is that if you continue to ignore proper etiquitte
in this newsgroup, people here will killfile you and that means you
will not be able to get answers to your questions.
Jerry Boyle
"XS11E" <xs...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:Xns99766FD5910D7x...@69.28.173.184...
> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> As best I can tell, Windows Mail is simply Outlook Express with a
>> new name.
>
> It has some changes and improvements, one being that it doesn't try to
> force top posting as OE did.
>
Not enough to warrant an entirely new name. I suspect they changed the name
because they removed more features than they added (and perhaps for valid
reasons).
> You can also turn off HTML before posting to newsgroups the same as you
> could in OE, by clicking on Tools/Options and select the "Send" tab,
> check Plain Text for News sending format.
>
> Doing so would be much appreciated, thanks!
>
I knew that and that's how I'm already set up.
I assume you also want me to uncheck "Reply to messages using the format in
which they were sent".
Give me a convincing reason, other than your appreciation, and I will do so.
Jerry
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew DeFaria <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote:
configured correctly, yours is not.
That's a matter of opinion and you know what they say about opinions...It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of proper etiquitte or, if you prefer, courtesy to others in the newsgroup. Newsgroup etiquitte is well established and has been for many years.
See my previous reply. Why?The biggest reason is that if you continue to ignore proper etiquitte in this newsgroup, people here will killfile you and that means you will not be able to get answers to your questions.
And anybody who wishes to killfile me by all means go right ahead. I could give a flying fuck...
Meantime XS11E get a real name you cowardly fuck.
XS11E
> XS11E wrote:
>> Andrew DeFaria <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote:
> No you stupid fuck, it's a matter of opinion only,
At least you're consistently wrong.
You really have no room to call others stupid.
XS11E
>
> "XS11E" <xs...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns99766FD5910D7x...@69.28.173.184...
>> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> As best I can tell, Windows Mail is simply Outlook Express with
>>> a new name.
>>
>> It has some changes and improvements, one being that it doesn't
>> try to force top posting as OE did.
>>
>
> Not enough to warrant an entirely new name. I suspect they changed
> the name because they removed more features than they added (and
> perhaps for valid reasons).
Obviously someone thought it needed a new name, who knows why? If you
ever looked at the folder for Outlook Express the .exe file is still
called msimn.exe from the old Microsoft Internet Mail and News which
has been gone for many years, don't know why they didn't change that
name?
> I assume you also want me to uncheck "Reply to messages using the
> format in which they were sent".
>
> Give me a convincing reason, other than your appreciation, and I
> will do so.
Proper etiquette? Responding in kind to someone as ignorant and
discourteous as Andrew DeFaria doesn't mean you should be equally
discourteous.
Laura
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message
> Laura wrote:
>> You can use Thunderbird without messing up your WM settings. Just
>> don't tell it to be your default e-mail or newsreader program. Plus,
>> don't have it import your mail until you feel ready to make the switch
>> permenant. I have used TB but I don't like the way it handles HTML
>> mail so I switched back to OE.
> Something I wrote as a blog entry one day. Although this is regarding
> Outlook and MS Word as an editor for "rich text compositions" Outlook
> and OE produce horrible HTML if you ever bothered to look at it (and I
> have!). Didn't like the way it handles HTML mail! Phooey! What do you
> know of such technologies as you seem to shun them to start with!
I only shun html in newsgroups since it has no place here. You don't see the
word "binaries" in the group title do you? I know, you don't care.
Ken and Jane Becker
> I have never had a problem when running older versions of Quicken (which
> by the way I've been using for 14 years).
>
> But, I've always backed up to a removable media. I have just now
> thought it would be much better to backup to one of my external hard
> drives.
>
Don,
I've had a little fun reading through your responses with Quicken,
Vista, and all the UAC permission stuff.
I'd thought I'd like to give you a perhaps different view on why you've
had problems, why Vista is giving you problems, and perhaps a view on
how to solve these problems in the future.
First: I don't happen to own and/or use a copy of Vista. Yep, I'm
running XP. However, I'm an old (probably too old) computer user. Yes,
I've used some relatively old computers... Like, say, the Altair home
brew that was advertised in Popular Electronics all those moons ago.
The first real multi-tasking computer systems I ran with (beyond the
single taskers like dedicated radar processors and the like) was
Purdue's old PIRATE system and an old, $DIETY knows what version Unix
system that ran on a pair of 11/78's in Purdue's EE department. I
continue to use Unix at work and have used Linux in and out of work. So,
you might say, I know the ins and outs of both Windows and Unixen systems.
More to the point, I happen to know somewhat about the security models
in both systems.
Point #1: Dos 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 2.1, 3.x, 4.x, 5.x, and 6.x, Windows 1.0,
2.0, 3.0, '95, '98, and ME had NO SECURITY MODEL. If you had access to
the computer what security was on there was put in haphazardly and
barely worked if at all.
Let's talk about Unix for a bit. Every directory and every file in Unix
has three permission bits for three different sets:
Read permission for User, Group, and Other
Write permission for User, Group, and Other
Execute permission for User, Group, and Other
This is often represented as a string: "rwxrwxrwx", where the first
"rwx" is for the user, the second "rwx" is for the group, and the third
"rwx" is for others.
There can be a ridiculously large number of users.
The users are members of groups.
Any user who is not a member of the group that "owns" a directory is an
"other".
Besides users with names like "john_doe" in groups like
"hardware_development", you also have users like "root", "mail" "cron"
and so on.
Point: System programs like, say, "sendmail" run in directories that
have group write permissions that are reserved for them and are
definitely not writable by run-of-the-mill user name/group combinations.
Further, Joe Random User can't write the directories in which sendmail
(or similar) programs are installed. For that matter, regular user
programs like, say, "vi" (a text editor) are installed in directories
that users can read and execute from, but can't write.
This means, generally, that configuration information on a program (last
file accessed, save files, etc.) aren't stored in the _program_
directories - they're stored in the individual user directories. There
are exceptions to this kind of thing, but they usually involve
non-program directories.
Now, Windows 1.x to ME runs on top of DOS. DOS was built as a cheap
knock-off of CP/M that ran on Intel processors. And CP/M itself was an
extremely cut-down version of the Unix of the day, written more or less
from scratch, and built, pretty much, without security. Remember: CP/M
ran on machines with, like, 4K (not Meg) of RAM. Hobbyist stuff. Single
user. No internet. Modems barely exist. No permissions, anywhere. I
don't know too much about CP/M but, after Microsoft got done with the
first few iterations of DOS, any permissions were minuscule and easy to
do away with. Want to overwrite COMMAND.COM? Go right ahead. Don't like
IBMBIO.SYS? Replace it with your own. Erase programs like deltree.exe in
the DOS directory on a hard drive? Be my guest. NO PROTECTIONS.
A virus-writer's paradise. Want to snarf a virus onto Excel.exe? Sure,
why not? There's nothing to stop a virus, worm, or what have you.
Yeah, Unix systems got infected, too. Usually by elevating the rights of
a program through something called "suid", which, if played right by Mr.
Nefarious, could take a user-space program and make it root. (That's
Administrator to you Windows NT and on types.) However, pretty much all
of the easy pickings in that direction are long gone. There have been
some proof of concept viruses and such for Linux and Unix systems - but,
by and large, those systems are a HECK of a lot more secure than Windows
XP and down.
Now, let's talk about the Windows security model. So, along comes
Microsoft and a bunch of newly hired on hands from DEC. VMS junkies. VMS
is a true-blue multitasking multiuser system that I, personally, have
run across a couple of times. The guys who built that and who, in the
end, designed Windows NT, knew about security. By this time Microsoft
was being hammered by more and more viruses and the like and _knew_ that
something had to change. NT was the answer.
NT has a serious security model. By and large it's the same security
model that's used in Win 2000, XP, 2003, and now Vista. To tell the
truth I've banged my head against how the security model works with
Workgroups, Domains, read and write permissions, and all that jazz, and
I'm still not overly clear about it. It's supposed to be more powerful
and more fine-grained than the Unix/Linux model... And, from what I've
heard, it's a heck of a lot harder to understand. Mere mortals don't
have a chance.
But, let's just say for the moment that a Unix-style (or Windows
NT-style, I'm not proud) security model can be put together on a Windows
box. What should be done?
Well, first of all, nobody should really have write permissions in the
Windows directory. For that matter, nobody should have write permissions
in Program Files. Local data should be stored with the user.
But there was a problem. Remember, Windows 1.x, 2.x, and 3.x, and pretty
much Windows 95, had no protections whatsoever. The people who wrote
spreadsheets, word processors, drivers for disk drives, modem, graphics
cards, and application programs of all stripes put their running data
where ever they wanted it back in those days.
Remember: In a Unix/Linux system, the only entity allowed to write to
the "/" (root) directory is root, the system administrator. The _only_
thing you find in there are more directories - no application files. And
you sure don't see things like "/Quicken".
Now, with Windows NT (or was it 2000?) Microsoft put in the directory
structure $ROOT\Documents and Settings\user_name\A whole bunch of
directories holding user-specific data. Ah - that sounds quite a bit
like Unix, doesn't it? They also create that directory "Program Files",
which, pretty much, sounds like good old /usr/bin. Or maybe
/usr/add-on/bin. But you get the idea.
However: Every application vendor in creation, including Microsoft,
wrote every directory they could think of in Windows 3.x. They kept it
up in Windows 9.x because, well, it would cost MONEY to change already
operating code.
Hence: in order not to break random applications, the default
permissions of Joe Random User on Windows NT, 2000, XP, and 2003 was set
to "Administrator". That's Unix root to you. And the virus and worms,
well, they're running, when they do run, with the same permissions as
the user who's running the web browsers, mail clients, etc. System files
overwritten, anybody?
Under Linux/Unix, from day one, all application programs run with the
same permissions as the Joe Random User. Joe gets hacked - and it's
still user permissions. The virus can't get into the system files. Any
infection is really hard to get started. And really hard, nearly
impossible, to hide.
Want to install a graphics driver? You gotta log on as _root_ on a Linux
system to do it. Want to install Open Office? You gotta log on as root.
Change graphics resolution? Well, most cases, you can do that because
the graphics driver people made that a user-settable bit of data in the
user's home directory. Or they really, truly parse any strings you pass
the graphics program and judiciously use the suid program to write
configuration data to selected system directories. Or, you log on as root.
Result: With a Linux/Unix system you log in as root from time to time to
install or remove stuff or maybe do stuff with drivers and such. 99% of
the time you run logged in as normal user. The difference is cleanly
delimited, everybody who writes code for Unix/Linux knows about the
model, and things work swimmingly. Yeah, you need two passwords, one for
user, one for root, but that's it. And one really doesn't use root too
often.
So, with Vista, Microsoft and the application people have bit the
bullet. They're trying, hard, to work their way up to something like the
Unix security model. It's well-proven that a model at least vaguely like
that keeps the hackers out. They're trying to keep user-level programs
from getting to the system files. For that matter, they're _really_
trying to keep people from opening up and writing random directories all
over the place.. Like DOS and Windows 1.x, 2.x, and 3.x did.
They got big problems. Tons of application code still thinks it can
write random files in its own program directories. While running under
user permissions. Oops. If one tries to lock down programs so the only
writing that goes on is in c:\Documents and
Settings\joe_user\application_data\random_app, one discovers that said
random_apps don't write where they're supposed to.
For that matter there are graphics drivers that like to save their
settings in c:\winnt. And change it all the time. While running as user.
Oops.
Microsoft has put in the wildest set of double-indirection,
back-assward, code-hanging-out-sideways attempts to get to a Unix/Linux
(or better) permissions model. Users still get to be "Administrator" by
default, but "Administrator", which used to be like unix root and could
do anything, is no longer running at a true root-like permission level.
There are higher levels of permissions that are roughly hidden. The UAC
stuff is, well, like logging on as root on a Unix system. But, since the
application programs were pretty much originally written to write data
all over the place (and this includes Windows components as well!), the
UAC keeps on popping up like a jackrabbit.
But you can see where they're making the attempt. Try to create a
directory called d:\quickenbackup and dump files in there? "Hey!"
Windows says, "That's a system level directory, you can't do that!" And
the attempt is failed.
I imagine that as time goes on various application developers are going
to realize the errors of their ways and start writing to the Vista
security model. Three years from now a normal user will likely rarely
see a UAC window because due to service packs from Microsoft and newer
programs from places like Intuit.
However, the new security model is going to mean changes in the habits
of Users, like us. On a Linux system I wouldn't DREAM of putting a
/quickenbackup in the root drive. It's simply not done. In
/home/my_user_name/quickenbackup, sure.
On Windows systems: When you want to put in a backup directory, the
general idea is to put such things in a directory space where you _know_
you're supposed to have read/write permissions. Like, for the prime,
in-your-face, no-kidding, Microsoft is giving you a Hint with #12 boots
and a 2x4 example, in c:\Documents and Settings\your_user_name\My
Documents. Also known as Start->My Documents. That's what that directory
is there for - for you to play with and stick in whatever you want!
This also explains why, Don, you could successfully write to the root
directory of removable media. Well, come to think of it, that's
precisely what Linux/Unix systems do, too!
Hope this explanation helps. And stop writing to the root of the c:\ drive!
Ken Becker
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew DeFaria <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote:
No you stupid fuck, it's a matter of opinion only,At least you're consistently wrong.
You really have no room to call others stupid.
Andrew DeFaria
Why is it that anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster is a maniac.
Andrew DeFaria
I assume you also want me to uncheck "Reply to messages using the format in which they were sent".Proper etiquette? Responding in kind to someone as ignorant and discourteous as Andrew DeFaria doesn't mean you should be equally discourteous.
Give me a convincing reason, other than your appreciation, and I will do so.
Andrew DeFaria
I only shun html in newsgroups since it has no place here.
You don't see the word "binaries" in the group title do you? I know, you don't care.
R. C. White
Thanks for that very informative and interesting read.
I've been running Vista since the beta, but I cut my computer teeth on the
original TRS-80, starting with Level I (4K) BASIC in December 1977. Since
I've always been just one guy with one computer and no users but me, I've
never had to learn anything about permissions and such, so Vista is adding
greatly to my education. I've still got a lot to learn. The UAC prompts
are much less, now that all my usual apps are installed. About the only
time I see one nowadays is when I'm opening Command Prompt as Administrator,
so that I can use the good old DOS command equivalents to do stuff that the
UI won't let me do. Or when I'm installing a new driver or application that
I've downloaded. Or when I'm trying to configure a user account for my
4-year-old grandson, who visits weekly and wants to surf to NickJr.com.
I've learned a little about Parental Controls, but still have a long way to
go.
I'll snip most of your post in the interest of space and bandwidth, Ken, but
that's not a reflection on its value!
RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(Retired. No longer licensed to practice public accounting.)
r...@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
(Currently running Vista Ultimate x64)
"Ken and Jane Becker" <jkbe...@no.spam.opt.opline.net> wrote in message
news:8uypi.77$Zl4...@newsfe12.lga...
> Don wrote:
>> I have never had a problem when running older versions of Quicken (which
>> by the way I've been using for 14 years).
>>
>> But, I've always backed up to a removable media. I have just now thought
>> it would be much better to backup to one of my external hard drives.
>>
> Don,
>
> I've had a little fun reading through your responses with Quicken, Vista,
> and all the UAC permission stuff.
>
> I'd thought I'd like to give you a perhaps different view on why you've
> had problems, why Vista is giving you problems, and perhaps a view on how
> to solve these problems in the future.
>
> First: I don't happen to own and/or use a copy of Vista. Yep, I'm running
> XP. However, I'm an old (probably too old) computer user. Yes, I've used
> some relatively old computers... Like, say, the Altair home brew that was
> advertised in Popular Electronics all those moons ago.
<SNIP>
Andrew DeFaria
Thanks for that very informative and interesting read.
I'll snip most of your post in the interest of space and bandwidth, Ken, but that's not a reflection on its value!
Jerry Boyle
> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "XS11E" <xs...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>> news:Xns99766FD5910D7x...@69.28.173.184...
>>> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As best I can tell, Windows Mail is simply Outlook Express with
>>>> a new name.
>>>
>>> It has some changes and improvements, one being that it doesn't
>>> try to force top posting as OE did.
>>>
>>
>> Not enough to warrant an entirely new name. I suspect they changed
>> the name because they removed more features than they added (and
>> perhaps for valid reasons).
>
> Obviously someone thought it needed a new name, who knows why? If you
> ever looked at the folder for Outlook Express the .exe file is still
> called msimn.exe from the old Microsoft Internet Mail and News which
> has been gone for many years, don't know why they didn't change that
> name?
>
FWIW, it's now WinMail.exe. And one feature that I think is gone, although
it may have been removed in later OE versions, is the ability to set a
custom indenting prefix for replies. Now all you have, for both plain text
and HTML, is a checkbox to turn indenting on or off. Perhaps this was done
to try to force conformity (which seems to be your passion) and, unlike
Andrew, I don't oppose this effort.
>> I assume you also want me to uncheck "Reply to messages using the
>> format in which they were sent".
>>
>> Give me a convincing reason, other than your appreciation, and I
>> will do so.
>
> Proper etiquette? Responding in kind to someone as ignorant and
> discourteous as Andrew DeFaria doesn't mean you should be equally
> discourteous.
>
That is not compelling enough. This is a discussion group and, when I am
*discussing* with Andrew, it is more important to me that I be "courteous"
to him. It pains me that others feel I am being rude to them, but I am not
talking to them, although they are free to eavesdrop if they *of their own
free will* choose to do so.
Technically I agree with Andrew; socially I agree with you, Laura and
others. I choose to side with Andrew when I am replying to him, although I
respect the opinion of those who disagree with me.
As I stated before, I do not originate HTML; I only reply to it. Even for
Andrew's posts, if someone else replies to him and converts his post to
plain text and I reply to them, my reply will be in plain text.
Furthermore, although I haven't tested it, the "Reply to messages using the
format in which they were sent" setting seems to apply to both Mail and
News. I don't want you or anyone else telling me how to handle my private
mail and I refuse to constantly have to toggle this setting just to keep you
happy.
In addition, Andrew is not ignorant. In some areas he is the *only* expert
in this group. Although many of us were focusing in on the original problem
in this thread, the problem might never have been solved without his
expertise. And I don't hear the OP complaining about the HTML; his problems
got solved and isn't that the most important issue? Tolerance is the
operative word here.
I think the proper fix for this issue, if indeed one is needed, is
technical. If only plain text is acceptable in a set of NGs, then news
servers need the ability to recognize this fact and refuse to distribute
HTML for such NGs. That's the only thing that will stop Andrew. A more
convincing argument might sway me, but you're going to have to dig deeper.
Jerry
P.S. I agree with Andrew: Who are you? Trying to bully us without even
identifying yourself. I consider that REALLY RUDE.
XS11E
> P.S. I agree with Andrew: Who are you? Trying to bully us without
> even identifying yourself. I consider that REALLY RUDE.
Pointing out proper etiquette for newsgroups is hardly bullying.
Posting under a nym means I'm a whole lot more concerned about security
issues than you seem to be, you'll find a very large percent of
experienced Usenet users will not use their real name or email address.
Jerry Boyle
> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> P.S. I agree with Andrew: Who are you? Trying to bully us without
>> even identifying yourself. I consider that REALLY RUDE.
>
> Pointing out proper etiquette for newsgroups is hardly bullying.
>
No problem. You've made your point and I've made mine. If others have read
your comments and modified their newsreaders and practices to more closely
conform to proper NG etiquette then I applaud your effort.
I've listened to you and understand you completely, but I'm sticking to my
position of slightly less than 100% compliance.
So you have nothing more to say to me, right?... Unless you wish to bully
me.
> Posting under a nym means I'm a whole lot more concerned about security
> issues than you seem to be, you'll find a very large percent of
> experienced Usenet users will not use their real name or email address.
>
To me it comes across as rude, especially when you're preaching. I
understand that you've made a *compromise* between security and more
personal interaction and I accept that. I expect you to accept that I am
making a compromise between 100% compliance with NG etiquette and the
clarity of my responses, given that I have a newsreader that mangles my
responses to some HTML posts if I convert them to plain text. And I'm not
going to switch newsreaders just to please you and a few other intolerant
fundamentalists.
Jerry Boyle
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
news:0r4oi.336638$p47.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:Nf4oi.336610$p47....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...>> news:my3oi.5$9A6.0@trnddc01...
>>
>>> The complete path of the file I am backing up is:
>>> C:\Program Files\Quicken\Qdata.QDF
>>
>> Have you tried to back up to C:\Documents\Quicken\Qdata.QDF?
>>
>
> Oops, sorry - that's a good place for your working copy of Quicken data.
> Make that a directory underneath C:\Documents, e.g.
> C:\Documents\Q03Backup.
>
> If this doesn't work it should eliminate file access permissions as a
> cause of your problem.
After reading Ken Becker's interesting post about UNIX, DOS and Windows
security models, I really felt that I should come back and correct my above
mistake.
Where I wrote C:\Documents\... I really meant to say the Vista "Documents"
folder for his user account. This is the equivalent of the XP "My Documents"
folder.
When Don reported via email that this didn't work it puzzled me. By the time
I realized my mistake Don's problem had been corrected.
I think Ken is absolutely correct. Under the evolving Windows security model
your user files and folders belong under your own "Documents" or "My
Documents" folder.
I know how they do file sharing under UNIX but I'm not sure what direction
they're going in for Windows. I don't think the Shared Documents folder
approach is the answer.
Jerry
Andrew DeFaria
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
P.S. I agree with Andrew: Who are you? Trying to bully us without even identifying yourself. I consider that REALLY RUDE.Pointing out proper etiquette for newsgroups is hardly bullying.
Posting under a nym means I'm a whole lot more concerned about security issues than you seem to be,
you'll find a very large percent of experienced Usenet users will not use their real name or email address.
Andrew DeFaria
I don't want you or anyone else telling me how to handle my private mail and I refuse to constantly have to toggle this setting just to keep you happy.
And I don't hear the OP complaining about the HTML; his problems got solved and isn't that the most important issue? Tolerance is the operative word here.
I think the proper fix for this issue, if indeed one is needed, is technical. If only plain text is acceptable in a set of NGs, then news servers need the ability to recognize this fact and refuse to distribute HTML for such NGs.
Ken and Jane Becker
> R. C. White wrote:
>> Thanks for that very informative and interesting read.
> Actually it was a bit long and at times a bit off (and yes I've done and
> understand all of what he said). IOW I think a lot of it only confused
> matters further and was loosely related...
Well, I'll agree with rambling, a bit off, and all that. But, maybe to
say it more directly:
1. In a rash attempt to improve Windows security, Vista is moving closer
to something like a Unix/Linux security model.
2. The application developers, like Intuit/Quicken, are moving towards
that model. They'd like to be there, but they make mistakes.
3. I'm pretty durn sure that the new security model should discourage
(well, should prohibit, but root is root) opening up random directories
all over the hard drive. Users who do _that_ on their own are violating
the (unwritten) new security rules - and that's where Don, the original
poster, ran into trouble.
If Microsoft was smart they'd put this on a plastic-coated 8x11 1/2"
piece of paper with "put your data _here_, not _there!", with a list of
Best Practices on the back. But that means educating Joe Six Pack... so
they're not going to do it.
Oh, well.
K. Becker
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
R. C. White wrote:--snippage
Thanks for that very informative and interesting read.Actually it was a bit long and at times a bit off (and yes I've done and understand all of what he said). IOW I think a lot of it only confused matters further and was loosely related...
Well, I'll agree with rambling, a bit off, and all that. But, maybe to say it more directly:
1. In a rash attempt to improve Windows security, Vista is moving closer to something like a Unix/Linux security model.
2. The application developers, like Intuit/Quicken, are moving towards that model. They'd like to be there, but they make mistakes.
3. I'm pretty durn sure that the new security model should discourage (well, should prohibit, but root is root) opening up random directories all over the hard drive. Users who do _that_ on their own are violating the (unwritten) new security rules - and that's where Don, the original poster, ran into trouble.
If Microsoft was smart they'd put this on a plastic-coated 8x11 1/2" piece of paper with "put your data _here_, not _there!", with a list of Best Practices on the back. But that means educating Joe Six Pack... so they're not going to do it.
Also, Microsoft still need to understand what a users home directory is supposed to be. And C:\Documents and Settings\<username> is not the place to be putting that! Nor is C:\Documents. This docucentric model is crap. I have much more than documents on my computer. I have images and music and programs and scrips and data files and databases and config files, etc., etc. Documents?!? That's the least of my files!
And 3rd party applications need to understand what a home directory is and they need to be installable in relative locations. This registry stuff is for the birds! Way too much stuff is placed into this monstrosity of a database that is always dirty and wasteful, hidden, not easily editable and way too misunderstood!
Oh, well.Yes oh well. My next computer will be an Ubuntu laptop... And I'd move to GNU Cash if it would to online stuff more like Quicken.
XS11E
>
> "XS11E" <xs...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
>> Posting under a nym means I'm a whole lot more concerned about
>> security issues than you seem to be, you'll find a very large
>> percent of experienced Usenet users will not use their real name
>> or email address.
> To me it comes across as rude, especially when you're preaching.
Sorry, didn't mean to come across as rude and I'm not preaching,
Usenet is getting very crowded with newer posters who have not
familiarized themselves with proper netiquette and I was only
offering instruction. In some other groups any violation of
netiquette would result in a severe flaming.
> I expect you to accept that I am making a compromise between 100%
> compliance with NG etiquette and the clarity of my responses,
> given that I have a newsreader that mangles my responses to some
> HTML posts if I convert them to plain text.
That surprises me, I don't use Windows Mail but I didn't know it had
problems with converting HTML to plain text. Have you asked about
the problem? There may be a fix or way to set it so it does not
mangle text, Microsoft has a newsgroup for Windows Mail, the server
would be msnews.microsoft.com and the group would be
microsoft.public.mail.misc
It might be worth your while to check it out.
> And I'm not going to switch newsreaders just to please you and a
> few other intolerant fundamentalists.
So you think preaching good manners make me an "intolerant
fundamentalist"? I sincerely hope you never tried that on your
parents!
XS11E
> That surprises me, I don't use Windows Mail but I didn't know it
> had problems with converting HTML to plain text. Have you asked
> about the problem? There may be a fix or way to set it so it does
> not mangle text, Microsoft has a newsgroup for Windows Mail, the
> server would be msnews.microsoft.com and the group would be
> microsoft.public.mail.misc
Oops, correction, should be microsoft.public.windows.vista.mail
Andrew DeFaria
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
"XS11E" <xs...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
Posting under a nym means I'm a whole lot more concerned about security issues than you seem to be, you'll find a very large percent of experienced Usenet users will not use their real name or email address.
To me it comes across as rude, especially when you're preaching.Sorry, didn't mean to come across as rude and I'm not preaching,
Usenet is getting very crowded with newer posters who have not familiarized themselves with proper netiquette and I was only offering instruction.
In some other groups any violation of netiquette would result in a severe flaming.
And I'm not going to switch newsreaders just to please you and a few other intolerant fundamentalists.So you think preaching good manners make me an "intolerant fundamentalist"?
I sincerely hope you never tried that on your parents!
Andrew DeFaria
When your pet bird sees you reading the newspaper, does he wonder why you're just sitting there, staring at carpeting?
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message news:46a80c4d$0$502$815e...@news.qwest.net...
I think the proper fix for this issue, if indeed one is needed, is technical. If only plain text is acceptable in a set of NGs, then news servers need the ability to recognize this fact and refuse to distribute HTML for such NGs.No a good solution would be to simply get better news reading software such that such posting are rendered to the liking of the user. So if I post in HTML but you prefer ASCII then you are simply shown ASCII. Many applications already do this! For example, Thunberbird does it. Also, as I point out to those stuck in the 60's, nothing but a command line program will do for me, when I was on SuSE 9.x I believe and I would use less to display the contents of an HTML file it would render the HTML in an ASCII form! It also allowed me to append a ":" to the end of the file name if I wanted to see it in raw format. Gee, teaching less new tricks! See it can be done. So then why can't it also be done for rn(1), trn(1), et. al.? If it were all of these id10t users would stop complaining because they really don't care about the excuses they give for HTML being bad like bandwidth, etc. They just care because it looks ugly to them. Well brother, if you're using an ASCII based reader you should be used to ugly by now!
I think I was a little too subtle about my purpose in making the above comments. I was trying to pawn XS11E off on the news committee so s/he would go away and leave us alone.Thanks for stepping in with your last batch of comments, Andrew. I was getting really frustrated and exhausted trying to patiently reason with a mouth with no ears, an opinion with no brain, and a pathologically obsessive concern for courtesy with absolute total lack of awareness of his/her own rudeness and pushiness.In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person I have ever encountered.Jerry
Andrew DeFaria
I think I was a little too subtle about my purpose in making the above comments. I was trying to pawn XS11E off on the news committee so s/he would go away and leave us alone.
Thanks for stepping in with your last batch of comments, Andrew. I was getting really frustrated and exhausted trying to patiently reason with a mouth with no ears, an opinion with no brain, and a pathologically obsessive concern for courtesy with absolute total lack of awareness of his/her own rudeness and pushiness.
In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person I have ever encountered.
(Note such comments are hurled at me by people like XS11E - if I could call such a code a person - in their attempts at bullying me. Have I been losing my edge or are there just more intelligent people such as yourself entering the room. I must ponder this all day today...).
XS11E
> Thanks for stepping in with your last batch of comments, Andrew.
Andrew is killfiled, of couse, but he apparently doesn't realize it?
> I was getting really frustrated and exhausted trying to
> patiently reason with a mouth with no ears, an opinion with no
> brain, and a pathologically obsessive concern for courtesy with
> absolute total lack of awareness of his/her own rudeness and
> pushiness.
You weren't reasoning, you were trying to justify your ignorance,
rudeness and lack of respect for others. In other words, you were
trying to defend the indefensible. You seem to feel the best way to do
so is to insult others.
> In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person
> I have ever encountered.
Your amazing rudness has no limits, does it?
It's hard to imagine people as boorish as you and Andrew but you've
proven such do exist.
Ken and Jane Becker
-- Ridiculous amounts of snippage
>> Oh, well.
> Yes oh well. My next computer will be an Ubuntu laptop... And I'd move
> to GNU Cash if it would to online stuff more like Quicken.
> --
>
Andy,
There's not a thing in your response that I don't fully agree with. And,
if GNU Cash did all that Quicken did, or at least close, I'd be out of
Quicken in a flash.
Have a good one.
Ken Becker
Jerry Boyle
And now you're the first person in over 20 years, other than spammers, to
make my kill file.
Andrew DeFaria
"Jerry Boyle" <jerry...@att.net> wrote:
Thanks for stepping in with your last batch of comments, Andrew.Andrew is killfiled, of couse, but he apparently doesn't realize it?
I was getting really frustrated and exhausted trying to patiently reason with a mouth with no ears, an opinion with no brain, and a pathologically obsessive concern for courtesy with absolute total lack of awareness of his/her own rudeness and pushiness.You weren't reasoning, you were trying to justify your ignorance, rudeness and lack of respect for others.
In other words, you were trying to defend the indefensible. You seem to feel the best way to do so is to insult others.
In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person I have ever encountered.Your amazing rudness has no limits, does it?
It's hard to imagine people as boorish as you and Andrew but you've proven such do exist.
Andrew DeFaria
Oh, well.Yes oh well. My next computer will be an Ubuntu laptop... And I'd move to GNU Cash if it would to online stuff more like Quicken.
Andy,
There's not a thing in your response that I don't fully agree with. And, if GNU Cash did all that Quicken did, or at least close, I'd be out of Quicken in a flash.
So the verdict is, unfortunately, still not ready for prime time.
I thought of contributing to the cause and writing code for this but it's much more than just code - it's needing to get agreements with the major players to support things.
Jerry Boyle
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message
> Jerry Boyle wrote:
>>
>> In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person I
>> have ever encountered.
>
> Gee, such a comment is usually hurled at me! I'll have to work harder! ;-)
>
Please, Andrew, I beg of you, don't even think about it.
I have only one vote. In the consensus poll I'm pretty sure you're still the
king. Heaven help us all should you ever decide to unleash the awesome power
of your majestic wrath :-)
Long live the king!!!
Jerry
[This plain-text response is brought to you in honor of XS11E]
Andrew DeFaria
"Andrew DeFaria" <And...@DeFaria.com> wrote in message
news:46a8b10d$0$495$815e...@news.qwest.net...
Jerry Boyle wrote:
In my over 20 years on USENET, XS11E is the most annoying person I have ever encountered.Gee, such a comment is usually hurled at me! I'll have to work harder! ;-)
Please, Andrew, I beg of you, don't even think about it.
I have only one vote. In the consensus poll I'm pretty sure you're still the king. Heaven help us all should you ever decide to unleash the awesome power of your majestic wrath :-)
Long live the king!!!
Bow to your king!!!
Jerry
[This plain-text response is brought to you in honor of XS11E]