install windows 2000 with preinstalled windows XP in Dell Inspiron.

[BC]

You make me laugh. Hiding behind MS hatred is often the position of the

inferior

Another example of the parallels between Bush
supporters and MS toadies. Bash Bush because
he's been a chronic liar and screwup and you'll
be accused of being blinded by hatred. Bash
Microsoft and its ever-bloated, ever-insecure,
proprietary snailware, and you'll likewise be
accused of being blinded by hatred.

-BC

 

[Tom Scales]

Another example of the parallels between Bush
supporters and MS toadies. Bash Bush because
he's been a chronic liar and screwup and you'll
be accused of being blinded by hatred. Bash
Microsoft and its ever-bloated, ever-insecure,
proprietary snailware, and you'll likewise be
accused of being blinded by hatred.

-BC

I admit you're entertaining. Stupid, but entertaining.

 

[BC]

What a bunch of clueless, Microsoft toadying answers.

Complete and utter nonsense.

Here we go, another low-tech cretin who can't tell
his OS from his ASs.

.... with which you apparently have absolutely no experience, or
you'd not be making such patently absurd claims.

I've likely retrofitted more PC's than you have
masturbated to. There was one office where I
retrofitted Win2K on some new Dells, while keeping
some other new Dells at Xp. Eventually the Xp
people asked for theirs to be retrofitted as well
after spending some time on the Win2k's. There is
large library where I had retrofitted *Windows 95*
on the public access PC's some years back, and
now they're dreading being forced to "upgrade" to
Win2k/Xp because of new library network software.
Win95 on an old 866Mhz P3 is un-friggin'-believably
fast. A 10Ghz P4 Xp with 4Gb of memory wouldn't
touch it. The old 3rd party security apps kept the
PC's clean, and they've been running Firefox and
Office 97 with little downtime for years. The disk
images average are only about 450Mb in size and so
it takes only a few minutes to reimage a messed up
PC.

Whatever happened to making code tighter and more
robust? The virus writers do it with much annoying
success, so why can't those overpriced clowns at
Microsoft do likewise?

Actually, I've found just the opposite.

Doubtful. Extremely so.

But then, I do know how to properly install, configure,
and secure an OS. If you start out from ineptitude,
you'll only go downhill.

And if you keep pulling stuff like that out of your ass,
you'll only end up with a pile of, well, your postings.

And how much video memory do the video adapters of
these PCs have?

A better question would be, "How come Microsoft or
the computer makers didn't put a big label on that
warned about how almost unusably slow the PC will
be after about a year or so?"

Admittedly, the GUI enhancements of WinXP require more
in the way of video capabilities than does Win2K. If one
is using bargain-basement hardware with an integrated
video chip that's wasting system memory, WinXP will be
somewhat slower than Win2k.

So in other words, Xp is a bigger resource hog than
Win2k, therefore it will run slower on the same
hardware. You expressed that point, which I of
course totally agree with, rather badly I should say.

However, this is easily addressed by a few simple mouse
clicks.

Silly me, I forgot about the secret menu that will
automatically add more memory and speed up your CPU
and hard drive with a couple of clicks.

And there's no such thing as "Windows rot" to affect
any version of Windows.

Oh really?:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/7565
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/TopTen.shtml#Rot
http://www.jimohalloran.com/archives/000200.html

I think your comments pretty much self-defined your
expertise in these matters.

-BC

 

[Tom Scales]

So basically you downgrade people to obsolete operating systems and are
proud of it, all because you are unable to learn new technology. We get it.

 

[RRR_News]

Joe,
Since it is a recent purchase of a Dell Notebook, I would think that there are
only XP drivers for the your notebook. Notebook drivers can be very tricky, and
be manufacturer specific. So you will have a difficult to impossible time for
finding drivers for your notebook for Win2000.

If you don't like the way XP looks, you can change it back to the "Classic" look
of Win2000.
1. Right click the Desktop> Properties> Advance tab> Windows & Buttons box>
Scroll to Windows Classic Style> Apply> OK> reboot PC.
You may want to change additional settings there, to suit your tastes.
2. Right click the Taskbar> Properties> StartMenu tab> Select Use Classic
StartMenu> Customize button> Make any changes you want> Apply/OK out of the
Wizard> Reboot your PC.
3. Start button> Control Panel> On the left> select Switch to Classic View>
Apply/OK your way out of Wizard> Reboot PC.

The Reboot your PC, may not be necessary, to make the changes take effect. It is
just a personal habit that I have. And it has not cause me any problems in the
past. You make up your own mind about this step.

--

Rich/rerat

(RRR News) <message rule>
<<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>

 

[Richard Urban]

Your lack of experience with Windows XP, and your inability to learn the
operating system, are hurting your "so called" customers/clients. Your only
solution is to take them back in time to an obsolete operating system.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Sparky Spartacus]

Take this with grain of salt....

I believe you can do it. The restore function, from what I can tell, is
based on a hidden partition and the BIOS, so yeah...probably. If possible,
I'd suggest a Ghost (or the like) image first, just in case.

Be sure to go to the Dell web site and download all the W2K drivers for the
hardware *before* you do anything and burn them to a CD.

Having said that, I think it's a mistake. XP is superior to W2K and you can
customize it to eliminate many of the concerns you have (probably mostly
with the interface). Also, support for W2K is scheduled to stop and it's not
clear how long patches and updates will be issued....

Plus, if you've gotten used to XP boot times, you'll be unhappy with W2K.

FWIW, I upgraded my Win98SE machine (an XPSB866r) to W2K in Jan, 2001,
looking for greater stability & security - which I got & was happy with
W2K. I would not, however, install W2K as a replacement for XP. Look
into the customization possibilities and post back, please. I routinely
undo a lot of the XP eye candy, e.g., Windows classic folders view, *no*
active content on the desktop, etc.

 

[Sparky Spartacus]

What a bunch of clueless, Microsoft toadying answers.
Windows XP has turned out to be high maintenance
crap compared to Windows 2000 and 98SE.

I got this far.

<yawn>

 

[BC]

Your lack of experience with Windows XP, and your inability to learn the

operating system, are hurting your "so called" customers/clients. Your only
solution is to take them back in time to an obsolete operating system.

What part of "Windows XP has turned out to be high
maintenance crap compared to Windows 2000 and
98SE" don't you understand, moron? What, you
consider massive code bloat with virtually no additional
functionality to be an "improvement" of any sorts? All
those little extra bits of code, virtually all of it due
to marketing and monopoly-protection concerns,
only serve to make things slower, more exploitable,
and less stable. Xp is no more than Win2k repackaged
with a new wrapper and with more things added to
it to go wrong. If you like your "new and improved"
version of anything -- a car, TV set, OS.... -- to
actually perform better and give more functionality
over the model it's replacing, Xp represents a step
backwards. And I'm not the only one thinking this:
http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=05/04/08/1340236&tid=11

At this point in time, Windows should have evolved
into a mature, tightly coded, robust product. Using
your PC should be like using your PlayStation or
Tivo (which runs Linux): you turn it on, do your thing,
shut it off. None of these endless, endless updates,
none of these "Send an error report to Microsoft"
messages, none of these endless hiding places
for worms, none of this having to be an expert in
HijackThis, etcetera friggin etcetera. There is
nothing that Xp does that even Win 3.11 couldn't
do in what, something like 1/150th the code
footprint. There is no excuse not to have a far more
reliable and faster version of Windows by now and
if you had any meaningful tech skills or knowledge,
you would admit this as well instead of just
reciting the official MS company line.

-BC

 

[Hank Arnold]

ROTFLMAO!!!! *NOW* I understand why you're the way you are.......

 

[Hank Arnold]

I strongly doubt that he has any "customers" other than his relatives......
;-)

 

[Hank Arnold]

You were entertaining for about 2 minutes. Let me see... how do I put it....

PLONK!!!!!!!!

 

[WSZsr]

Relatives? I suspect that there is some inbreeding involved with BC and his
clan....

 

[Dan Seur]

Love your preadolescent tantrums, BC!

What are you doing hanging around a Win forum anyway? Masochism? Why not
put all that energy into tightening up ScaLAPACK? That'd be fun.




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0550-0, 12/10/2005
Tested on: 12/10/2005 9:41:48 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2004 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

 

[BC]

You were entertaining for about 2 minutes. Let me see... how do I put it....

PLONK!!!!!!!!

In other words, "Waahhh, mommy, mommy, the mean
old anonymous Internet guy I insulted called me names
and used logic and facts to make me look like a a stupid
MS toady. Make him stop, mommy, make him stop....."

-BC

 

[John John]

Oh for crying out loud you're going around in circles and jumping around
from one idiocy to another! Going to your beginning post and talking
about multi-boot environment (Windows 2000 and Windows XP) what on earth
would you be troubleshooting on the system partition other that the boot
files boot.ini, ntldr, ntdetect.com and possibly the scsi ntbootdd.sys?

With regards to your stupid password utilities are you suggesting that
the Security Accounts Manager (SAM) and Local Security Authority (LSA)
protected subsystem would also be on the system partition in multi-boot
environments?

Do I think XP is a big improvement on Windows 2000? No, other than a
few things aimed mostly at network managers XP offers little new real
features to Windows 2000. Much like you I think that XP is mostly fluff
and bloat and that the few real improvements aimed at network managers
are of little concern to most home/casual users. Would I recommend that
users who purchased computers with Windows 2000 upgrade to XP? No, in
very few instances would anything of real improvement be gained. But,
would I suggest or recommend that people who buy new computers with XP
installed downgrade it to Windows 2000? NO! Absolutely not! Much like
you said in your first post the users should get rid of useless fluff
and set the operating system to their liking.

As for your assertion that Windows 98SE is superior to Windows 2000 and
that it crashes less often, the protected and scalable memory and
processor support offered by NT systems is reason enough for users to
abandon the W9x platform. Have you ever had an application crash on
W9x? Who hasn't? What happens then? You have to reboot the pc. What
happens in the same scenario on an NT system? Obviously you know little
about that simple difference between the two platforms. You have made
that clearly known in one of your other post by implying that you had
made a favour to a library by having them keep their Windows 95 systems
rather than pointing out to them the obvious shortfalls of the now
obsolete Windows 95 and gently prodding them towards the newer NT
platform. You have done them no favours! You don't know of the serious
memory and virtual memory handling problems suffered by Windows 95, at
the very least you should have explained that to them and moved them up
to W98. You have also not told them of Windows 95 poor hardware support
and of the fact that most new printers and external devices have no
support for Windows 95, or that fewer and fewer software developers
offer support for Windows 95. Some help you are.

Do I make mistakes and post incorrect information at times? Yes I do.
In these times others will point it out to me, then I research the
subject and post again saying "oops" and apologize for the error and
mark it up to new knowledge gained. At the end of the day if I learned
something new I consider that the day was a good one. I know that what
I don't know would make up a really big book! You on the other hand
think that you ARE the big book! In reality you are nothing more than a
leaflet.

John

 

[Guest]

I dont know if anyone has written this before but, if you uninstall Windows
XP - then you will not be able to get it back, Unless you buy the Windows XP
Upgrade from a store.

 

[BC]

Love your preadolescent tantrums, BC!

What are you doing hanging around a Win forum anyway? Masochism? Why not
put all that energy into tightening up ScaLAPACK? That'd be fun.

I was only Googling for info about whether people were
still getting Win2k preinstalled on new PC's when I
came across this thread and the bogus answers the
original poster was getting to his query. Reciting
Microsoft's laughable, lying-ass reasons for keeping
with its latest form of insecure bloatware is NOT
being helpful in any way. Where is the economic
incentive for Microsoft to improve anything if people
simply do whatever the company says to do? With
their monopolistic position in the marketplace, the
average consumer has few recourses except to not
buy into whatever they are selling, especially if you
want to see genuine improvement in PC software.
Microsoft is notorious for not improving any of its
products without there being some sort of real
competition (or threat) real or imagined. Internet
Explorer, which has always been only just a direct
rip off of NSCA Mosaic/Netscape, has been in
developmental limbo for years until Firefox finally
started catching on and people simply stopped
using IE altogether whenever they could. The same
applies to the OS. How many of you techies
reading this have lost an afternoon or evening
helping a friend or a relative purging every trace
of worm and spyware off a "family" PC? There's no
good excuse for this, none. Xp is slower than 2k
and 98se so why bother? Want/need iTunes?
Then get 2k. As it is, there are a number of sites,
most notably music sites that require 2k/Xp as is
for downloading and there is not a single legitimate
technical reason for this -- it's all Microsoft
deliberately forcing, directly or indirectly,
developers, to use its proprietary DRM crapware,
which uses all sorts of dubious programming
hooks not available in older Windows versions.

ScaLAPACK? Isn't that an old Fortran program?
If Microsoft had any use for it, they would rewrite
it in Visual Studio, add a few "extensions," rename
it MScaLapack, and then make their version just
incompatible enough with the original for people
not to bother with the original.

-BC

 

[BC]

You sound like the guys I get called in to clean
up after. You probably have your MCSE certificate
all nicely framed and hanging next to your photo
of George and Laura Bush.

-BC

 

[Dan Seur]

You sound like losers I've seen in small bars all over the world. The
heavy duty language you specialize in accomplishes diddlysquat and your
assertions of competence are - how should I say this - unconvincing,
yeah, unconvincing.

And you ought to google for ScaLAPACK instead of talking from your rump.

I was only Googling for info about whether people were
still getting Win2k preinstalled on new PC's when I
came across this thread and the bogus answers the
original poster was getting to his query. Reciting
Microsoft's laughable, lying-ass reasons for keeping
with its latest form of insecure bloatware is NOT
being helpful in any way. Where is the economic
incentive for Microsoft to improve anything if people
simply do whatever the company says to do? With
their monopolistic position in the marketplace, the
average consumer has few recourses except to not
buy into whatever they are selling, especially if you
want to see genuine improvement in PC software.
Microsoft is notorious for not improving any of its
products without there being some sort of real
competition (or threat) real or imagined. Internet
Explorer, which has always been only just a direct
rip off of NSCA Mosaic/Netscape, has been in
developmental limbo for years until Firefox finally
started catching on and people simply stopped
using IE altogether whenever they could. The same
applies to the OS. How many of you techies
reading this have lost an afternoon or evening
helping a friend or a relative purging every trace
of worm and spyware off a "family" PC? There's no
good excuse for this, none. Xp is slower than 2k
and 98se so why bother? Want/need iTunes?
Then get 2k. As it is, there are a number of sites,
most notably music sites that require 2k/Xp as is
for downloading and there is not a single legitimate
technical reason for this -- it's all Microsoft
deliberately forcing, directly or indirectly,
developers, to use its proprietary DRM crapware,
which uses all sorts of dubious programming
hooks not available in older Windows versions.

ScaLAPACK? Isn't that an old Fortran program?
If Microsoft had any use for it, they would rewrite
it in Visual Studio, add a few "extensions," rename
it MScaLapack, and then make their version just
incompatible enough with the original for people
not to bother with the original.

-BC



---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0550-0, 12/10/2005
Tested on: 12/10/2005 1:23:16 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2004 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0550-0, 12/10/2005
Tested on: 12/10/2005 1:27:19 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2004 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com