Hibernate not working

[BillW50]

In

Not over here, at least at this end. I sometimes beat it to the
punch, and just do it manually.

Same here and that is when it fails for me.

I preferred to have OE automatically compact in the background like
it used to (each time after you opened OE), but that option was
removed. Now I have to remember to do it myself, or wait until that
100th count is reached.

Yes I remember. I also run a reg file which sets the counter to zero, so
I don't have to worry about the 100th time. ;-)

I don't know what that is, but guess I haven't needed it.

EWF makes viruses totally worthless. Thus they are totally ineffective
against your system. Kind of makes the big benefit of Linux totally
useless, doesn't it? ;-)

But you'd have to install them manually. And there's probably a few
of them.
But I'm not really arguing for or against SP3, except just to mention
that it resolved an intermittent svchost bug issue (in my case), and
I think it's required for at least some newer apps. (I had seen
requirements of SP3 listed for some programs, but can't recall which
now). And, of course, if you want to install some of the later
Microsoft updates which may require it, but I generally avoid these,
anyways.

Yes I have seen some applications say they require SP3. Although I tried
them under SP2 and they work just fine. And there is probably a KB to
solve that svchost bug. As it always seem to work that way.

 

[Tim Meddick]

About your problem with SP3 and OE crashing when it compacts it's [*.dbx]
folders ;

If you set the following registry value to "5" it stops OE entirely from
ever compacting it's folder-files .....


Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Identities\{0A1F2ED0-6616-418F-AE4A-F6E9FEC17E27}\Software\Microsoft\Outlook
Express\5.0]
"Compact Check Count"=dword:00000005


....only, here in my reproduced reg-file, the alpha-numerically named
sub-key has a unique identifier which will be different on your own
computer.

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

 

[Roy]

How large are the .dbx files? If over 100 MB, OE begins to freak out.
Also, you shouldn't store *anything* in the default folders like Inbox
and Sent Items. You should create folders for storage and limit their
size. T-Bird, OTOH, or Outlook, can handle much larger loads.

Both of you are stupid if you don't install SP3 and all the subsequent
updates. XP is MS' bastard child now and keeping up-to-date with updates
is essential.

I downloaded over 100 updates AFTER SP3, many of them related to
security. Certainly worthwhile to have them. If you have EWF which
actually cripples your computer in many ways and uses computer
resources needlessly, then you probably don't need them as you are
living in a cocoon anyway.
==

 

[BillW50]

In

I downloaded over 100 updates AFTER SP3, many of them related to
security. Certainly worthwhile to have them. If you have EWF which
actually cripples your computer in many ways and uses computer
resources needlessly, then you probably don't need them as you are
living in a cocoon anyway.

Really Roy? Say you want to bet on this? As I am game! As I have over a
dozen XP computers here and I run them all under all different
configurations. And I can tell you, there is no evidence whatsoever as
what you are saying is true. So how much are you willing to lose Roy?

 

[BillW50]

In

About your problem with SP3 and OE crashing when it compacts it's
[*.dbx] folders ;

If you set the following registry value to "5" it stops OE entirely
from ever compacting it's folder-files .....

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Identities\{0A1F2ED0-6616-418F-AE4A-F6E9FEC17E27}\Software\Microsoft\Outlook
Express\5.0]
"Compact Check Count"=dword:00000005

...only, here in my reproduced reg-file, the alpha-numerically named
sub-key has a unique identifier which will be different on your own
computer.

Really? Mine says:

"Compact Check Count"=dword:00000000

All changing it to dword:00000005 means you can open and close 95 more
times before it wants to compact.

 

[mm]

In


Well in my case, some of my XP computers does have only SP2. Three
reasons for this.

1) Some older applications doesn't work with SP3. One of them is OE6.
:-(

2) Some computers doesn't have enough storage for SP3 to install.
Especially 4GB SSD on the motherboard netbooks.

3) No new features as far as the user is concern. So why bother?

Doesn't MS keep tring to update with the automatic updates?

Same question for the OP?

 

[Tim Meddick]

That's probably the reason that I have mine re-set this value at every
logon back to "5" by a logon script via a reg.exe command..

I had forgotten the exact procedure I used to come to the conclusion that
"5" was the best value - something to do with being unable to close the OE
options maintenance page if it's set to anything less than "5", I think.

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London.

 

[Roy]

In

Really Roy? Say you want to bet on this? As I am game! As I have over a
dozen XP computers here and I run them all under all different
configurations. And I can tell you, there is no evidence whatsoever as
what you are saying is true. So how much are you willing to lose Roy?

Well it is true that I downloaded over 100 updates since SP3 was
installed. Everyone's set-up is different so I don't make bets. Do
what you want...they are your machines.
==

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In

Yes, OE6 means Outlook Express v6. And what broke is compacting and
it can often fail with folders.dbx under SP3.


Microsoft's EWF for one. If you install SP3, EWF protection becomes
worthless.

<snip>

There is a version of EWF that works just fine with SP3. I have
dozens of machines running it in the field. All you have to do is
update it and you will be fine.

 

[BillW50]

In Zaphod Beeblebrox typed on Thu, 12 May 2011 08:15:19 -0400:

<snip>

There is a version of EWF that works just fine with SP3. I have
dozens of machines running it in the field. All you have to do is
update it and you will be fine.

Yes I know about it. Although I don't have access to EWF for SP3. Nor am
I interested in SP3 on my systems that run XP-SP2. As the computers I
have installed SP3 on, I already regret. So no need to have more
regrets, now is there? Besides, this one for example SP3 won't even fit
on the SSD that is soldered on the motherboard. I got smarter, as my
other SSD systems have removable SSD. ;-)

 

[BillW50]

In
Roy typed on Thu, 12 May 2011 00:39:58 -0700 (PDT):

Well it is true that I downloaded over 100 updates since SP3 was
installed. Everyone's set-up is different so I don't make bets. Do
what you want...they are your machines.

Who is really living in a cocoon Roy? This computer right here has only
100MB free on the 4GB SSD soldered on the motherboard. Thus I can't use
updates on it at all. If I try, all of the free space will be gone and
the computer crashes. Asus sold them that way and Microsoft allowed them
to sell XP OEM licenses.

So you would think this computer is at greater risk of getting viruses.
But guess what Roy? It has never had a single virus yet. Nor have I ever
had a Windows virus since I started running Windows back in '93. And I
can tell you that security updates is the weakest of all security
measures. There are far better ways to protect yourself. And if you do
it right, security updates are meaningless.

And your belief that EWF actually cripples your computer, how so? As you
can toggle it on or off. When off, it isn't there and XP operates
normally. When on, it is like running your whole system in a sandbox.
And this is *far* more effective against viruses than trusting in
security updates. But clueless people like you just wouldn't know any
better. Isn't that so Roy?

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In Zaphod Beeblebrox typed on Thu, 12 May 2011 08:15:19 -0400:

Yes I know about it. Although I don't have access to EWF for SP3.
Nor am I interested in SP3 on my systems that run XP-SP2. As the
computers I have installed SP3 on, I already regret. So no need to
have more regrets, now is there? Besides, this one for example SP3
won't even fit on the SSD that is soldered on the motherboard. I got
smarter, as my other SSD systems have removable SSD. ;-)

So your statement that EWF doesn't work with SP3 was a mistake, or...?

--
Zaphod

Arthur: All my life I've had this strange feeling that there's
something big and sinister going on in the world.
Slartibartfast: No, that's perfectly normal paranoia. Everyone in the
universe gets that.

 

[BillW50]

In Zaphod Beeblebrox typed on Thu, 12 May 2011 14:52:58 -0400:

So your statement that EWF doesn't work with SP3 was a mistake, or...?

Well let's say I wanted it. So how do I get it? Windows Update doesn't
know EWF is even there.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In Zaphod Beeblebrox typed on Thu, 12 May 2011 14:52:58 -0400:

Well let's say I wanted it. So how do I get it? Windows Update
doesn't know EWF is even there.

That's because it isn't a part of Windows XP, it is a part of Windows
Embedded, so you have to own a license for the correct product. Since
you apparently do not, your use of it is a violation of the licensing
agreement. I find it amusing that you are complaining in a public
newsgroup started by Microsoft about an illegally acquired piece of
Microsoft software not working with an updated version Microsoft
Windows. Catch 22.

 

[BillW50]

In

That's because it isn't a part of Windows XP, it is a part of Windows
Embedded, so you have to own a license for the correct product. Since
you apparently do not, your use of it is a violation of the licensing
agreement. I find it amusing that you are complaining in a public
newsgroup started by Microsoft about an illegally acquired piece of
Microsoft software not working with an updated version Microsoft
Windows. Catch 22.

It is amusing that you are accusing me of a violation. No I got mine
legally from "Windows XP Embedded SP2 Trial Edition" straight from
Microsoft's own website. ;-)

 

[BillW50]

In

No, not really. What else exactly happened when you did it, besides
that one EWF issue? Some other software issues, or booting up
issues, or?

OE6 broke on compacting, my TV tuner (KW-TVUSB506RF-PRO) stopped
working, and EWF broke as well. Otherwise it just bloats already bloated
XP for very little reason whatsoever. It is probably so huge and offers
so little, as it probably has all of those National Security backdoors
in it.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In

It is amusing that you are accusing me of a violation. No I got mine
legally from "Windows XP Embedded SP2 Trial Edition" straight from
Microsoft's own website. ;-)

So, you are still using it as a part of an OS built from the Windows
XP Embedded SP2 Trial Edition?

If not, and as you imply, you are using on a Windows XP (non-Embedded)
system, you *are* violating the license agreement.

If so, how long have you been using it? You also realize it is only
for non-production use, meaning you cannot use it in anything other
than a test or development environment, and each build of the OS is
limited to a specific time trial (180 days, as I recall). Any other
use, and you *are* violating the license agreement.

 

[BillW50]

In

So, you are still using it as a part of an OS built from the Windows
XP Embedded SP2 Trial Edition?
Yes!

If not, and as you imply, you are using on a Windows XP (non-Embedded)
system, you *are* violating the license agreement.
No!

If so, how long have you been using it?

Just installed it today on that Asus EeePC 701 that I was posting from
earlier today in fact. That one up to yesterday didn't even have it on
there.

You also realize it is only for non-production use, meaning you cannot
use it in anything other than a test or development environment, and
each build of the OS is limited to a specific time trial (180 days, as
I recall). Any other use, and you *are* violating the license
agreement.

Yes!

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In

Yes!

Really? I find it curious that all of your previous postings were
discussing XP and said nothing about Embedded - certainly, most would
have made that distinction. I also find it curious that you didn't
get the most current trial version of the XP Embedded line instead of
the one you did...

And of course, if you just installed XP Embedded on your Asus EeePC
701 with a 4GB SSD, there would be plenty more than the 100MB free you
were complaining about earlier too. Curiouser and curiouser, said
Alice...

No!

Then, why would you complain about EWF not being available through
Windows Update - XP Embedded doesn't use Windows Update at all. But
you knew that, right?

Just installed it today on that Asus EeePC 701 that I was posting
from earlier today in fact. That one up to yesterday didn't even
have it on there.

Really? Then why were you complaining *yesterday* about the
incompatibility?

Yes!

Oh, and lest I forget, it is also a violation of the licensing
agreement to use a build of Windows Embedded as a general computing
device - you know, like on a net book used to surf the web and post to
newsgroups...

 

[BillW50]

In

Really? I find it curious that all of your previous postings were
discussing XP and said nothing about Embedded - certainly, most would
have made that distinction. I also find it curious that you didn't
get the most current trial version of the XP Embedded line instead of
the one you did...

EWF only comes with embedded and that should be a given.

And of course, if you just installed XP Embedded on your Asus EeePC
701 with a 4GB SSD, there would be plenty more than the 100MB free you
were complaining about earlier too. Curiouser and curiouser, said
Alice...

Yes it did, but I needed my applications and data too. And if you want
me to give them up for updates, well that would be crazy. Why would I
want just Windows and I can't have anything else?

Then, why would you complain about EWF not being available through
Windows Update - XP Embedded doesn't use Windows Update at all. But
you knew that, right?

The trial doesn't have anything to update.

Really? Then why were you complaining *yesterday* about the
incompatibility?

Because I have seen it before.

Oh, and lest I forget, it is also a violation of the licensing
agreement to use a build of Windows Embedded as a general computing
device - you know, like on a net book used to surf the web and post to
newsgroups...

Really? News to me.