Microsoft Windows Vista Community Forums - Vistaheads
Recommended Download



Welcome to the Microsoft Windows Vista Community Forums - Vistaheads, YOUR Largest Resource for Windows Vista related information.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so , join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Driver Scanner

Trying to update a Windows 98 SE box to Windows XP

microsoft.public.windowsupdate






Speedup My PC
Reply
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-01-2008
lbrtchx@gmail.com
 

Posts: n/a
Trying to update a Windows 98 SE box to Windows XP
A machine is loaded with Windows 98 and needs to be updated with Win
XP
~
After installing Win98 without any apparent problems, I could only
log into it using "safe mode", but then my dvd/cd rom didn't work
~
I unsuccessfully tried different options under "Step-by_Step
Configuration" but none of them made win98 recognize the disk, so i
could then install Windows XP
~
help, please!
~
lbrtchx
thanks
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-02-2008
VanguardLH
 

Posts: n/a
Re: Trying to update a Windows 98 SE box to Windows XP
<lbrtchx@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:add42111-03d5-4c9b-b742-6381f9b492c0@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> A machine is loaded with Windows 98 and needs to be updated with Win
> XP
>
> After installing Win98 without any apparent problems, I could only
> log into it using "safe mode", but then my dvd/cd rom didn't work
>
> I unsuccessfully tried different options under "Step-by_Step
> Configuration" but none of them made win98 recognize the disk, so i
> could then install Windows XP


NOTE: FollowUp-To header was ignored. Original list of newsgroups was
used for this reply.

NOTE: I don't use the Google Groups webnews-for-dummies interface. I
doubt they have forced the inclusion of a FollowUp-To header since
other current Google Groupers don't have it in their posts.

Don't use the FollowUp-To header. Posting to, say, 5 newsgroups but
moving replies to just 1 of them or to a completely different one
means you disconnect the visitors of those other 4 (or 5) newsgroups
from the rest of the discussion. If a newsgroup is appropriate for
your post then it is also appropriate for the replies. You are using
the FollowUp-To header to move replies to YOUR "home" newsgroup but
which the users of the other newsgroups may not visit. After all, if
you cross-post and include your "home" newsgroup then you'll see all
those replies in your home newsgroup and meanwhile all the other users
can still see the replies in their newsgroup where you decided to also
publish your post.

In http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/, it says, "For a
cross-post, you may want to set the Followup-To: header line to the
most suitable group for the rest of the discussion". Read another
way, that means you disconnect the discussion from all the visitors of
the other newsgroups to which you decided to publish your post. Why
did you publish to those other newsgroups if you are going to yank the
discussion away from those users and perhaps even from the
respondents? If your post was appropriate for all the groups to which
you cross-posted then why wouldn't those same groups be appropriate
for the replies? To yank away the discussion to your "home" group is
rude since that is probably not the "home" group for your respondents.
You wanted replies which may require further replies but now your
respondents no longer see the thread in the newsgroup that they visit
to where you published your post. Also, the respondents may not know
if their reply is appropriate in the "home" group that you happen to
choose. In general, malcontents and spammers use the FollowUp-To
header to hide negative replies to their flame/spam posts, like
sending the replies off to a *.test newsgroup.

There are some cases where FollowUp-To should be used. For example,
say a newsgroup is supposed to only get used to citing the content of
a spam e-mail. Discussions about that spam are not supposed to be
published in that newsgroup. Just the exhibits are published there.
If someone wants to discuss that particular spam, their replies should
go into a different newsgroup meant for those discussions. I believe
that is how some of the NANAE newsgroups operate but the principle
applies elsewhere. That is not the case with your post.

If you do use the FollowUp-To header, you are expected per netiquette
to alert the readers of your post that you used that header. Be
polite and add a note (at the start of your post) saying that you used
the header (ex., "Note: FollowUp-To used and points to <group>". Many
times respondents wonder where the hell their reply post went because
they expect to see it in the group they visited when they read your
post. Not all NNTP clients alert the user that the poster used the
FollowUp-To header. Think about it: you post to multiple newsgroups
but yank the replies to a different newsgroup than where your
respondents visited, then you need more help and reply to those
replies but which are now only in your "home" newsgroup, but the
respondents won't see their posts nor will they see your replies to
them asking for more help. FollowUp-To is not required when you
cross-post since your "home" newsgroup should be one those that were
specified in the list of newsgroups. You'll see watch the discussion
in your newsgroup and the respondents or lurkers can watch the same
discussion in their newsgroup. If you don't want replies to show up
in all the newsgroups to which you cross-post then don't cross-post
over there.

When crossposting, there are not multiple copies of your posting
wasting bandwidth for each to get them propagated to other NNTP
servers and there aren't multiple copies of your post consuming disk
space. A single copy gets sent to the other NNTP servers and a single
copy resides on each NNTP server with pointers to it to make it show
up in multiple newsgroups. You aren't saving bandwidth or disk space
by redirecting replies for a cross-posted message to a single
newsgroup.

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-02-2008
Alan
 

Posts: n/a
Re: Trying to update a Windows 98 SE box to Windows XP
VanguardLH,

Now that you've written a treatise on FollowUps, Headers, NNTP -- and other
off-topic material -- do you actually have an answer or SOME useful
information regarding the OP's question?

Or, do you just like to see your name in lights?

Alan

"VanguardLH" <VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote in message
news:e7Nz%23OQTIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> <lbrtchx@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:add42111-03d5-4c9b-b742-6381f9b492c0@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> A machine is loaded with Windows 98 and needs to be updated with Win
>> XP
>>
>> After installing Win98 without any apparent problems, I could only
>> log into it using "safe mode", but then my dvd/cd rom didn't work
>>
>> I unsuccessfully tried different options under "Step-by_Step
>> Configuration" but none of them made win98 recognize the disk, so i
>> could then install Windows XP

>
> NOTE: FollowUp-To header was ignored. Original list of newsgroups was
> used for this reply.
>
> NOTE: I don't use the Google Groups webnews-for-dummies interface. I
> doubt they have forced the inclusion of a FollowUp-To header since other
> current Google Groupers don't have it in their posts.
>
> Don't use the FollowUp-To header. Posting to, say, 5 newsgroups but
> moving replies to just 1 of them or to a completely different one means
> you disconnect the visitors of those other 4 (or 5) newsgroups from the
> rest of the discussion. If a newsgroup is appropriate for your post then
> it is also appropriate for the replies. You are using the FollowUp-To
> header to move replies to YOUR "home" newsgroup but which the users of the
> other newsgroups may not visit. After all, if you cross-post and include
> your "home" newsgroup then you'll see all those replies in your home
> newsgroup and meanwhile all the other users can still see the replies in
> their newsgroup where you decided to also publish your post.
>
> In http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/, it says, "For a
> cross-post, you may want to set the Followup-To: header line to the most
> suitable group for the rest of the discussion". Read another way, that
> means you disconnect the discussion from all the visitors of the other
> newsgroups to which you decided to publish your post. Why did you publish
> to those other newsgroups if you are going to yank the discussion away
> from those users and perhaps even from the respondents? If your post was
> appropriate for all the groups to which you cross-posted then why wouldn't
> those same groups be appropriate for the replies? To yank away the
> discussion to your "home" group is rude since that is probably not the
> "home" group for your respondents. You wanted replies which may require
> further replies but now your respondents no longer see the thread in the
> newsgroup that they visit to where you published your post. Also, the
> respondents may not know if their reply is appropriate in the "home" group
> that you happen to choose. In general, malcontents and spammers use the
> FollowUp-To header to hide negative replies to their flame/spam posts,
> like sending the replies off to a *.test newsgroup.
>
> There are some cases where FollowUp-To should be used. For example, say a
> newsgroup is supposed to only get used to citing the content of a spam
> e-mail. Discussions about that spam are not supposed to be published in
> that newsgroup. Just the exhibits are published there. If someone wants
> to discuss that particular spam, their replies should go into a different
> newsgroup meant for those discussions. I believe that is how some of the
> NANAE newsgroups operate but the principle applies elsewhere. That is not
> the case with your post.
>
> If you do use the FollowUp-To header, you are expected per netiquette to
> alert the readers of your post that you used that header. Be polite and
> add a note (at the start of your post) saying that you used the header
> (ex., "Note: FollowUp-To used and points to <group>". Many times
> respondents wonder where the hell their reply post went because they
> expect to see it in the group they visited when they read your post. Not
> all NNTP clients alert the user that the poster used the FollowUp-To
> header. Think about it: you post to multiple newsgroups but yank the
> replies to a different newsgroup than where your respondents visited, then
> you need more help and reply to those replies but which are now only in
> your "home" newsgroup, but the respondents won't see their posts nor will
> they see your replies to them asking for more help. FollowUp-To is not
> required when you cross-post since your "home" newsgroup should be one
> those that were specified in the list of newsgroups. You'll see watch the
> discussion in your newsgroup and the respondents or lurkers can watch the
> same discussion in their newsgroup. If you don't want replies to show up
> in all the newsgroups to which you cross-post then don't cross-post over
> there.
>
> When crossposting, there are not multiple copies of your posting wasting
> bandwidth for each to get them propagated to other NNTP servers and there
> aren't multiple copies of your post consuming disk space. A single copy
> gets sent to the other NNTP servers and a single copy resides on each NNTP
> server with pointers to it to make it show up in multiple newsgroups. You
> aren't saving bandwidth or disk space by redirecting replies for a
> cross-posted message to a single newsgroup.
>



Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-02-2008
realcestmoi
 

Posts: n/a
Re: Trying to update a Windows 98 SE box to Windows XP
VanguardLH, tries to tell you to post in the appropiate newesgroup, which is
very right

Since your problem has nothing to do with windows update sincce you are
trying to UPGRADE your win98 to xp!!!

Your problem is related to a not well functioning windows 98, so you should
ONLY post in the microsoft.public.win98.disks.general newsgroup which you
can find here:
http://www.microsoft.com/communities...isks.gener al

And no I do not like to see my name in lights, it already is

Just trying to get you to the right place for help.

Good luck there.

Best regards,
Michel Denie


"Alan" <somewhere@nospam.not> wrote in message
news:%23TRRbhUTIHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> VanguardLH,
>
> Now that you've written a treatise on FollowUps, Headers, NNTP -- and
> other off-topic material -- do you actually have an answer or SOME useful
> information regarding the OP's question?
>
> Or, do you just like to see your name in lights?
>
> Alan
>
> "VanguardLH" <VanguardLH@mail.invalid> wrote in message
> news:e7Nz%23OQTIHA.4440@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> <lbrtchx@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:add42111-03d5-4c9b-b742-6381f9b492c0@f3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>> A machine is loaded with Windows 98 and needs to be updated with Win
>>> XP
>>>
>>> After installing Win98 without any apparent problems, I could only
>>> log into it using "safe mode", but then my dvd/cd rom didn't work
>>>
>>> I unsuccessfully tried different options under "Step-by_Step
>>> Configuration" but none of them made win98 recognize the disk, so i
>>> could then install Windows XP

>>
>> NOTE: FollowUp-To header was ignored. Original list of newsgroups was
>> used for this reply.
>>
>> NOTE: I don't use the Google Groups webnews-for-dummies interface. I
>> doubt they have forced the inclusion of a FollowUp-To header since other
>> current Google Groupers don't have it in their posts.
>>
>> Don't use the FollowUp-To header. Posting to, say, 5 newsgroups but
>> moving replies to just 1 of them or to a completely different one means
>> you disconnect the visitors of those other 4 (or 5) newsgroups from the
>> rest of the discussion. If a newsgroup is appropriate for your post then
>> it is also appropriate for the replies. You are using the FollowUp-To
>> header to move replies to YOUR "home" newsgroup but which the users of
>> the other newsgroups may not visit. After all, if you cross-post and
>> include your "home" newsgroup then you'll see all those replies in your
>> home newsgroup and meanwhile all the other users can still see the
>> replies in their newsgroup where you decided to also publish your post.
>>
>> In http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/primer/part1/, it says, "For a
>> cross-post, you may want to set the Followup-To: header line to the most
>> suitable group for the rest of the discussion". Read another way, that
>> means you disconnect the discussion from all the visitors of the other
>> newsgroups to which you decided to publish your post. Why did you
>> publish to those other newsgroups if you are going to yank the discussion
>> away from those users and perhaps even from the respondents? If your
>> post was appropriate for all the groups to which you cross-posted then
>> why wouldn't those same groups be appropriate for the replies? To yank
>> away the discussion to your "home" group is rude since that is probably
>> not the "home" group for your respondents. You wanted replies which may
>> require further replies but now your respondents no longer see the thread
>> in the newsgroup that they visit to where you published your post. Also,
>> the respondents may not know if their reply is appropriate in the "home"
>> group that you happen to choose. In general, malcontents and spammers
>> use the FollowUp-To header to hide negative replies to their flame/spam
>> posts, like sending the replies off to a *.test newsgroup.
>>
>> There are some cases where FollowUp-To should be used. For example, say
>> a newsgroup is supposed to only get used to citing the content of a spam
>> e-mail. Discussions about that spam are not supposed to be published in
>> that newsgroup. Just the exhibits are published there. If someone wants
>> to discuss that particular spam, their replies should go into a different
>> newsgroup meant for those discussions. I believe that is how some of the
>> NANAE newsgroups operate but the principle applies elsewhere. That is
>> not the case with your post.
>>
>> If you do use the FollowUp-To header, you are expected per netiquette to
>> alert the readers of your post that you used that header. Be polite and
>> add a note (at the start of your post) saying that you used the header
>> (ex., "Note: FollowUp-To used and points to <group>". Many times
>> respondents wonder where the hell their reply post went because they
>> expect to see it in the group they visited when they read your post. Not
>> all NNTP clients alert the user that the poster used the FollowUp-To
>> header. Think about it: you post to multiple newsgroups but yank the
>> replies to a different newsgroup than where your respondents visited,
>> then you need more help and reply to those replies but which are now only
>> in your "home" newsgroup, but the respondents won't see their posts nor
>> will they see your replies to them asking for more help. FollowUp-To is
>> not required when you cross-post since your "home" newsgroup should be
>> one those that were specified in the list of newsgroups. You'll see
>> watch the discussion in your newsgroup and the respondents or lurkers can
>> watch the same discussion in their newsgroup. If you don't want replies
>> to show up in all the newsgroups to which you cross-post then don't
>> cross-post over there.
>>
>> When crossposting, there are not multiple copies of your posting wasting
>> bandwidth for each to get them propagated to other NNTP servers and there
>> aren't multiple copies of your post consuming disk space. A single copy
>> gets sent to the other NNTP servers and a single copy resides on each
>> NNTP server with pointers to it to make it show up in multiple
>> newsgroups. You aren't saving bandwidth or disk space by redirecting
>> replies for a cross-posted message to a single newsgroup.
>>

>
>



Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Article ID: 931712 The "Windows Features" dialog box is empty in Windows Vista, or you receive an error message that includes the following code when you try to use Windows Update: "0x80073712" KBArticles English 1 04-28-2010 10:32
Article ID: 930857 Ein Update ist Windows-Fehlerberichterstattung in Windows Vista, um sicher durchzuführen verfügbar, dass ein Update an Problemberichte gesandt wird, nachdem Sie Berechtigung nur erteilt haben KBArticles German 0 10-22-2007 21:20
Article ID: 927532 When you use Windows Update to install an update in Windows Vista, the update may not appear in the Programs and Features item in Control Panel KBArticles English 0 10-22-2007 20:00
Article ID: 940016 The Auto Disconnect dialog box appears and then automatically disappears after you close Windows Internet Explorer 7 in Windows Vista KBArticles English 0 10-22-2007 20:00
A Windows Vista Security Tip: Use Windows Update to Update all Microsoft Programs on your Computer tokjad@gmail.com microsoft.public.windows.vista.security 5 05-12-2007 23:33




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:09.




Driver Scanner - Free Scan Now

Vistaheads.com is part of the Heads Network. See also XPHeads.com , Win7Heads.com and Win8Heads.com.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin for phpBBStyles.com.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120