Pauldog

Member
  • Content count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Pauldog

  1. I've used Windows 2000 for several years and wasn't aware of these hotfixes. I have applied all the high priority security updates and many of the other updates. Should I consider applying this rollup?
  2. KB971111 is only for Windows 2000, not for XP and newer. As tomasz86 mentioned elsewhere, all the other updates listed will work fine with Windows 2000, even though they're listed for XP and not 2000. (This must be because of MS dropping support for 2000 and not bothering to list relevant updates any more.). See KB2446704 (MS11-028) replaces KB983583 (MS10-060). We should have a sticky on this.
  3. Now I understand it. I replaced my copy of 982524 with 976576, since it's smaller and works only with .NET 2.0. On the page describing it (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/976576), they link to a download of 982524. The only way I can see to get 976576 is through your link.
  4. Would 982524 replace 976576? Neither update mentions Windows 2000, though that doesn't necessarily mean all that much.
  5. Having some bad sectors doesn't necessarily mean that your disk drive is going bad. Get some diagnostic software that can read the S.M.A.R.T. data logged on your drive, and see if it's reporting anything abnormal. The free software available from the maker of your drive will probably have something that can do this. As far as making clones of your multiple partitions, XXCLONE will work for all the XP partitions. It doesn't care that the target partitions are smaller as long as all the files fit. For the ME partition, I think it's likely that it would work like it does for W98. With W98, I could make a working bootable copy of my W98 disk by simply copying everything from a working W98 disk to a blank partition if I do it on a system running W98. (It didn't work if I was running Windows 2000,and so it's unlikely to work if you're running XP.) My process involved shutting off virtual memory on the source drive, then shutting it down, running W98 from another disk, and then copying all files from the source W98 disk to a cleared target drive. That way, there's no problem with files on the source disk that are in use and changing. There was a simple way to make the new disk bootable (to get the right boot sector, I think), but I don't remember how. When you boot up the new disk, remember to activate virtual memory. But this whole discussion could be moot, because I think there's a good chance that your 500 GB disk drive is OK. But at the same time, backing up your systems with XXCLONE is not a bad idea. It means that in case of a disk failure, you will be up and running again very quickly.
  6. Now that you can get into the BIOS, you can set it up so you can boot from a CD. Since you think the system was tampered with, you might as well re-install XP and go through the activation process. If it fails, then I'd call Microsoft. Even if this system really was tampered with, I don't think anyone else could have used the product key to activate another system. If that did happen, Microsoft's records should show that your friend's use of this key was the first, and then they'd probably kill the illegitimate installation if possible. But since it's XP, an "ancient" system in their eyes, what will probably happen is that your call to MS will simply get them to OK your activation with few questions asked on their part.
  7. If you have a spare hard drive, I still favor using a utility like XXCLONE to keep a backup clone of your system when it's working. Then you can swap it in as the main drive and use it to "pave over" the infected drive very quickly.
  8. That list, despite being updated several times, is a little old. For instance, NDP20SP2-KB974417-x86.exe should be replaced by NDP20SP2-KB983583-x86.exe.
  9. That is what I meant. Too bad, but since I'm going to install XP onto a new hard drive, the point is moot for now. Thank you for the answers.
  10. I'm going to add this here, instead of starting a new thread. I want to confirm that I've completely updated .NET 2.0 on XP, and that I won't have any problems avoiding Microsoft trying to force 3.0 and 3.5 on me by saying I still need to install the 70 MB KB951847 (which seems to be available only through WIndows Update.) The few apps I've used that needed .NET mostly needed 2.0, with maybe one that wanted 1.1. (God forbid that newer .NET versions be backward compatible! Much better to keep many versions simultaneously installed, and really load up the system, the registry, and the hard drive.) I started with no .NET software, and then installed .NET 2.0 SP2 (filename: NetFx20SP2_x86.exe). After doing that, the two apps that use .NET 2 worked. (It's kind of odd, since normally a service pack needs something to be applied to, but in this case, it works all by itself. Or does it? That's one question right off the bat.) Then I applied these updates: NDP20SP2-KB958481-x86.exe (Does this one contain the updates from KB95184 that apply to.NET 2.0?) NDP20SP2-KB976569-x86.exe NDP20SP2-KB979909-x86.exe NDP20SP2-KB982167-x86.exe NDP20SP2-KB2418241-x86.exe NDP20SP2-KB2446704-v2-x86.exe NDP30SP2-KB982524-x86.exe (After that, Windows Update still listed KB951847 as something I should get.) Applying these updates manually is excruciatingly, amazingly, disturbingly slow, even the ones with small file sizes. Another method is to slipstream this file into an XP install disc: OnePiece_Microsoft.NET_Framework_v2.0.50727.3620_True_AddOn_ENU.cab I'd like to know: 1) If there's a way to use this last file to install .NET 2.0 on a running XP system. 2) If my update list is complete as of early May, 2011, and without obsolete files. 3) If I'll have some kind of trouble for not including 3.0 and 3.5. 4) Why a so-called "service pack" (.NET 2.0 SP2) can be installed from scratch and seem to work fine for apps that need it, rather than being applied to an earlier version. [if cars worked like this, we'd be spending most of our car time with the hood up, scratching our heads, rather than driving.]
  11. I'm also wondering what files I need to use in order to install a completely updated .NET 2.0 on a running XP system. I'll post that question in a new thread.
  12. All I've ever needed is 2.0. I only use two apps that need .NET at all, and one requires 2.0. The other is nlite, which can use 2.0.
  13. What we need is someone who's made a working bootable DVD to tell us the details.
  14. I just tried doing this with a Laserjet 2200d (my default printer), and it worked as it should. I happen to have a 5MP PS printer installed, too, so I tried it, and it also preserved the 2-up setting. Make sure you have the latest driver. The one that comes in the "point and print bundle" is not the latest one. You want "02.12.01 4 Apr 2002." (File name lj632en.exe) http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/SoftwareDescription.jsp?lang=en&cc=us&prodTypeId=18972&prodSeriesId=25481&prodNameId=15013&swEnvOID=181&swLang=8&mode=2&taskId=135&swItem=lj-46416-1 If that fails, maybe try uninstalling the printer, (maybe) then rebooting, and then reinstalling the printer.
  15. I trust Microsoft less than the unofficial packs. Microsoft makes mistakes constantly, with one update screwing up another, and the update needing one or two updates of its own. The forums and unofficial packs save time, and let me know which updates have been superceded and can be ignored. It's much harder to squeeze that kind of info out of Microsoft.