IE 8 Internet Problem

Win XP Pro Machine - Installed IE 8 and now can't access web pages. I can
ping web sites (yahoo.com) and receive email but can't open web pages.

I've run TCP IP fix program and ran O/S repair but neither helped. Any
suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
again.

KenP

"KenP" <KenP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FB1E0479-55F8-40FE-8A31-53D93292D2DE@microsoft.com...
> Win XP Pro Machine - Installed IE 8 and now can't access web pages. I can
> ping web sites (yahoo.com) and receive email but can't open web pages.
>
> I've run TCP IP fix program and ran O/S repair but neither helped. Any
> suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
>
> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
> again.
>
> KenP


That's odd, your post came up both times.

Are you running Family Protection Services from McAfee?

There's no reason that IE8 can't get to the net if you previous version
could get on.

I had an unpleasant experience (again) last week with McAfee and an IE8
install on a Win7 machine. Check your Add & Remove Programs for Family
Protection Service from McAfee, if it's there Uninstall it and see if your
browser comes back.

Bad idea, now you will need to monitor two threads for responses. Worse, some
will see the double post and regard you as to rude to deserve a response to
either post.

--
G. R. Woodring

Date: 2/6/2010 1:10 PM, Author: KenP Wrote:
>

< Snipped > - Better if all responses were only to the first thread.

> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
> again.
>
> KenP

In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting a
second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and some
Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.

And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
netiquette violations.

</top post>

"G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
news:ua1K6v1pKHA.5760@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Bad idea, now you will need to monitor two threads for responses. Worse,
> some will see the double post and regard you as to rude to deserve a
> response to either post.
>
> --
> G. R. Woodring
>
> Date: 2/6/2010 1:10 PM, Author: KenP Wrote:
>>
>
> < Snipped > - Better if all responses were only to the first thread.
>
>> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
>> again.
>>
>> KenP

Date: 2/6/2010 1:50 PM, Author: Jeff Strickland Wrote:
> In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting a
> second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and some
> Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.
>

This group seems to have a slight delay by itself. Posting through a web
interface would impose additional delay as the web server updates periodically
from the news server. Also, the OP might have been able to refresh the browser
display manually which may or may not have displayed the posting. At any rate,
multiple postings create confusion for the OP and for those posting responses.

> And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
> netiquette violations.
>

I normally bottom post in news groups, and I prefer it in support groups because
the top-to-bottom continuity seems more natural. However top posting seems to
be the more common method on the Microsoft groups so that is how I post here.
The netiquette principle here is "When in Rome..." :-)

--
G. R. Woodring

>
>
> "G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
> news:ua1K6v1pKHA.5760@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Bad idea, now you will need to monitor two threads for responses. Worse,
>> some will see the double post and regard you as to rude to deserve a
>> response to either post.
>>
>> --
>> G. R. Woodring
>>
>> Date: 2/6/2010 1:10 PM, Author: KenP Wrote:
>> < Snipped > - Better if all responses were only to the first thread.
>>
>>> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
>>> again.
>>>
>>> KenP
>
>

"G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
news:OcF1hN2pKHA.1556@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
> Date: 2/6/2010 1:50 PM, Author: Jeff Strickland Wrote:
>> In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting a
>> second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and some
>> Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.
>>
>
> This group seems to have a slight delay by itself. Posting through a web
> interface would impose additional delay as the web server updates
> periodically from the news server. Also, the OP might have been able to
> refresh the browser display manually which may or may not have displayed
> the posting. At any rate, multiple postings create confusion for the OP
> and for those posting responses.
>
>> And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
>> netiquette violations.
>>
>
> I normally bottom post in news groups, and I prefer it in support groups
> because the top-to-bottom continuity seems more natural. However top
> posting seems to be the more common method on the Microsoft groups so that
> is how I post here. The netiquette principle here is "When in Rome..." :-)
>
> --
> G. R. Woodring
>

Personally, I prefer top posting (I was yanking your chain earlier) because
I generally read a post from top to bottom, then elect to Reply, and my news
client puts the cursor at the top. If I bottom post, as proper netiquette
calls for, then I have to open a post, scroll to the bottom to read, then
Reply and scroll to the bottom again to begin my comments. Top posting lets
me read, then Reply and not scroll all over the place to do it.

The problem becomes that I may want to Reply in the middle, and top posting
places stuff in a strange order later on when the discussion becomes
fragmented.

What REALLY causes problems though is Mixed Posting, where some poster make
their comments at the top and others make them at the bottom. I like the
When-in-Rome approach, if you are commenting to a top post, then you should
top post as well. You should never ever top post in a discussion where
everybody else is bottom posting. If I was a judge, I'd have to impose the
death penalty for offenders.

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlrjeff@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hkkh4m$sn8$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
> news:OcF1hN2pKHA.1556@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Date: 2/6/2010 1:50 PM, Author: Jeff Strickland Wrote:
>>> In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting
>>> a second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and
>>> some Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.
>>>
>>
>> This group seems to have a slight delay by itself. Posting through a web
>> interface would impose additional delay as the web server updates
>> periodically from the news server. Also, the OP might have been able to
>> refresh the browser display manually which may or may not have displayed
>> the posting. At any rate, multiple postings create confusion for the OP
>> and for those posting responses.
>>
>>> And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
>>> netiquette violations.
>>>
>>
>> I normally bottom post in news groups, and I prefer it in support groups
>> because the top-to-bottom continuity seems more natural. However top
>> posting seems to be the more common method on the Microsoft groups so
>> that is how I post here. The netiquette principle here is "When in
>> Rome..." :-)
>>
>> --
>> G. R. Woodring
>>
>
> Personally, I prefer top posting (I was yanking your chain earlier)
> because I generally read a post from top to bottom, then elect to Reply,
> and my news client puts the cursor at the top. If I bottom post, as proper
> netiquette calls for, then I have to open a post, scroll to the bottom to
> read, then Reply and scroll to the bottom again to begin my comments. Top
> posting lets me read, then Reply and not scroll all over the place to do
> it.
>
> The problem becomes that I may want to Reply in the middle, and top
> posting places stuff in a strange order later on when the discussion
> becomes fragmented.
>
> What REALLY causes problems though is Mixed Posting, where some poster
> make their comments at the top and others make them at the bottom. I like
> the When-in-Rome approach, if you are commenting to a top post, then you
> should top post as well. You should never ever top post in a discussion
> where everybody else is bottom posting. If I was a judge, I'd have to
> impose the death penalty for offenders.
>


AS FOR THE "STRANGE DELAY" ...
Notice that my posts are timestamped within a minute of each other. My stuff
shows up immediately.

My apology again on 2nd posting. I refreshed screen numerous time and it
never showed up. It only showed up when I changed groups and came back to
this one. Thanks for the suggestions, I'll see what happens.

"Jeff Strickland" wrote:

> In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting a
> second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and some
> Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.
>
> And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
> netiquette violations.
>
> </top post>
>
> "G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
> news:ua1K6v1pKHA.5760@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > Bad idea, now you will need to monitor two threads for responses. Worse,
> > some will see the double post and regard you as to rude to deserve a
> > response to either post.
> >
> > --
> > G. R. Woodring
> >
> > Date: 2/6/2010 1:10 PM, Author: KenP Wrote:
> >>
> >
> > < Snipped > - Better if all responses were only to the first thread.
> >
> >> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
> >> again.
> >>
> >> KenP
>
>
> .
>

Forgot to mention it will get on Internet if I start in SAFE MODE. Since I
ran the O/S repair, I'm back to IE 6.

"KenP" wrote:

> My apology again on 2nd posting. I refreshed screen numerous time and it
> never showed up. It only showed up when I changed groups and came back to
> this one. Thanks for the suggestions, I'll see what happens.
>
> "Jeff Strickland" wrote:
>
> > In his defense, he waited an hour for his post to appear before posting a
> > second time, many repeat-posters only wait a couple of minutes, and some
> > Reply to their own post that their post didn't come up.
> >
> > And, you top posted, so perhaps you're not the best person to point out
> > netiquette violations.
> >
> > </top post>
> >
> > "G. R. Woodring" <tejbbqevat@rneguyvax.arg> wrote in message
> > news:ua1K6v1pKHA.5760@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > > Bad idea, now you will need to monitor two threads for responses. Worse,
> > > some will see the double post and regard you as to rude to deserve a
> > > response to either post.
> > >
> > > --
> > > G. R. Woodring
> > >
> > > Date: 2/6/2010 1:10 PM, Author: KenP Wrote:
> > >>
> > >
> > > < Snipped > - Better if all responses were only to the first thread.
> > >
> > >> I posted this an hour or so ago and it hasn't showed up yet so am posting
> > >> again.
> > >>
> > >> KenP
> >
> >
> > .
> >

"KenP" <KenP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CD1BD223-5A5E-4C75-B8A4-244B6B019B2B@microsoft.com...
> My apology again on 2nd posting. I refreshed screen numerous time and it
> never showed up. It only showed up when I changed groups and came back to
> this one. Thanks for the suggestions, I'll see what happens.
>

That's a normal behavior, Ken. Refresh may not get the latest posts. Exiting
the group then re-entering will always get them.