XP with SP1/SP2

[SeaWings]

I purchased a computer with MSW XP with SP2. I want to wipe my hard
drive and re-install XP. I discovered that the disc I received with my
computer contains XP1. I tried to contact the manufacturer but they no
longer exist. Is it possible for me to load XP1 onto my computer and
upgrade it to SP2 so that I don't have to purchase XP with SP2?

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I purchased a computer with MSW XP with SP2. I want to wipe my hard
drive and re-install XP. I discovered that the disc I received with
my computer contains XP1. I tried to contact the manufacturer but
they no longer exist. Is it possible for me to load XP1 onto my
computer and upgrade it to SP2 so that I don't have to purchase XP
with SP2?

Certainly. You can get SP2 from Windows Updates.

 

[SeaWings]

SeaWings wrote:
-
I purchased a computer with MSW XP with SP2. I want to wipe my hard
drive and re-install XP. I discovered that the disc I received with
my computer contains XP1. I tried to contact the manufacturer but
they no longer exist. Is it possible for me to load XP1 onto my
computer and upgrade it to SP2 so that I don't have to purchase XP
with SP2?-


Certainly. You can get SP2 from Windows Updates.

Thank you so very much. That will save me money and allow me to get my
computer working properly again.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Thank you so very much. That will save me money and allow me to get
my computer working properly again.

You're welcome. Glad to help.

 

[Rock]

I purchased a computer with MSW XP with SP2. I want to wipe my hard
drive and re-install XP. I discovered that the disc I received with my
computer contains XP1. I tried to contact the manufacturer but they no
longer exist. Is it possible for me to load XP1 onto my computer and
upgrade it to SP2 so that I don't have to purchase XP with SP2?

Thanks in advance for any help.

If you have an installation CD with SP1, it would save a step to slipstream
SP2 with the installation CD to create one with SP2 incorporated, then when
you do the reinstall, do so with the slipstreamed CD. They you don't have
to apply SP2 afterwards. Here are some links on slipstreaming.
Autostreamer makes it easy. I have also included a link to the download
site for the full version of SP2. Ignore the title. It applies to stand
alone systems as well.

Slipstream
http://www.theeldergeek.com/slipstreamed_xpsp2_cd.htm
http://unattended.msfn.org/beginner/slipstream.htm

Autostreamer
http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/1092632287/1
http://www.simplyguides.net/guides/using_autostreamer/using_autostreamer.html
http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=223562

Download Windows Service Pack 2 Standalone Version
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...BE-3B8E-4F30-8245-9E368D3CDB5A&displaylang=en

 

[Baloo]

I purchased a computer with MSW XP with SP2. I want to wipe my hard
drive and re-install XP. I discovered that the disc I received with my
computer contains XP1. I tried to contact the manufacturer but they no
longer exist. Is it possible for me to load XP1 onto my computer and
upgrade it to SP2 so that I don't have to purchase XP with SP2?

Yes. That's what Windows Update is for...

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Yes. That's what Windows Update is for...

It's certainly true that depending on what news server you use, and other
factors, not everyone gets all messages at the same time, and that may cause
someone to reply very late to a thread. But you are replying to his question
more than *four* days after I answered it, he thanked me, and I said you're
welcome.

 

[antioch]

It's certainly true that depending on what news server you use, and other
factors, not everyone gets all messages at the same time, and that may
cause someone to reply very late to a thread. But you are replying to his
question more than *four* days after I answered it, he thanked me, and I
said you're welcome.

Its that bloody 'echo' again.
Keep getting it all over the newsgroups.
And its not coming from that flaky, slow grinding web interface.
Its here in newsgroups
Or perhaps there is one of these super-super extra powered antispam progs
slowing things down so much that causes the echo.
Did you know Ken, that if you have such a prog there is no need to munge
emails addresses in newsgroups. Not many people know that.
Rgds
Antioch
It is getting me slightly pizzed off when you know a thread is finished,
only to find it has been resurrected

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Its that bloody 'echo' again.
Keep getting it all over the newsgroups.
And its not coming from that flaky, slow grinding web interface.
Its here in newsgroups
Or perhaps there is one of these super-super extra powered antispam
progs slowing things down so much that causes the echo.
Did you know Ken, that if you have such a prog there is no need to
munge emails addresses in newsgroups. Not many people know that.

No, I know nothing about such programs. Which ones are you thinking of?

 

[Baloo]

It's certainly true that depending on what news server you use, and other
factors, not everyone gets all messages at the same time, and that may
cause someone to reply very late to a thread. But you are replying to his
question more than *four* days after I answered it, he thanked me, and I
said you're welcome.

Why make such a big deal out of it? More answers, even if they're
redundant, serve to confirm the correct answer. Discouraging participation
only serves to hurt users.

 

[antioch]

No, I know nothing about such programs. Which ones are you thinking of?

Sorry Ken - my wit missed you - it was another poster, the echo, who
suggested such should be used in newsgroups, would you believe.
Then no more munging of our email addresses would be needed ;-)
Antioch

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Why make such a big deal out of it? More answers, even if they're
redundant, serve to confirm the correct answer. Discouraging
participation only serves to hurt users.

I never discourage participation, and it's not a matter a matter of making
"such a big deal out of it." But most people come here to ask a single
question, and after they get the answer they need, they are gone. In a
situation like this, after someone has gotten the answer he needs, and
thanked the person he got it from long ago, any additional participation is
nothing but a waste of bandwidth; he almost certainly is no longer even here
to see what you call your "participation."

If you want to help and participate here, great--but do so in a timely
manner. If you try to participate by showing up *days* after the thread is
over and done with, the person asking the question will seldom see your
redundant answer, and you are doing nothing but wasting all of our time.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Sorry Ken - my wit missed you - it was another poster, the echo, who
suggested such should be used in newsgroups, would you believe.
Then no more munging of our email addresses would be needed ;-)

My apologies. I missed the joke.

 

[Baloo]

If you want to help and participate here, great--but do so in a timely
manner. If you try to participate by showing up *days* after the thread is
over and done with, the person asking the question will seldom see your
redundant answer, and you are doing nothing but wasting all of our time.

But the next user that comes through and does their homework by searching
the newsgroup for the answer will see it. Don't think so short-term.

 

[Rock]

But the next user that comes through and does their homework by searching
the newsgroup for the answer will see it. Don't think so short-term.

The answers were already there. They don't need your validation days later
to make them know it's valid. You waste everyone's time, including that
future person searching for an answer.

 

[Ron Sommer]

: Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
:
: > It's certainly true that depending on what news server you use, and
other
: > factors, not everyone gets all messages at the same time, and that may
: > cause someone to reply very late to a thread. But you are replying to
his
: > question more than *four* days after I answered it, he thanked me, and I
: > said you're welcome.
:
: Why make such a big deal out of it? More answers, even if they're
: redundant, serve to confirm the correct answer. Discouraging
participation
: only serves to hurt users.
:
: --
: Baloo
: email & xmpp: (e-mail address removed)
:

How are more answers, after the original poster has already replied to what
fixed their problem, confirming the correct answer?
A newsgroup is not a chat room.

 

[Baloo]

How are more answers, after the original poster has already replied to
what fixed their problem, confirming the correct answer?
A newsgroup is not a chat room.

Because sane people search the archives before asking a new question.
You're not answering for just the original poster, but everyone else who
searches for that question in the future. Like you said: Newsgroup isn't
a chatroom. Quit living in the moment.