Just an observation

Moron!

-----Original Message-----
To Gary S. Terhune, wish I had this advantage
I use my own then figure out the cure. Haven't
far enough to totally crash yet!! and I only
do this with what I think is an OS problem or
maintenance problem. Try to post simple instructions
is also my priority because you never know
how technical inclined the other party is.



Snip

-----Original Message-----

or even by replicating the issue on a test machine
(though
I haven't had one
handy for a couple of months.)

.

Maybe he has a bit more class! rofl

-----Original Message-----
I wonder why PCR has not jumped into this?
-----Original Message-----
Hi Gary,
You are a great fountain of knowledge.
I will just pick 2 post even though I would be able to
point out more.
1: "Password Manager suggestion needed" posted by "Big
Mac" on June5 you point counter point w/"Mostly Me"
First I thank you for some what backing me on that.
I see what "Mostly Me" said is valid and what you said
is
valid. But when it gets down to the main reasons for
using
or not using something. You drop it and fall back on
what
your preferences are. And not what the poster may
need.Or
want. I feel you are allot like my brother. If my need
is
not the same as his then my need is invalid.
You may need the few cookies and such on your machine
or
not need the password recall. But others may need the
password recall and not need the cookies. Each post is
an
individual with differant needs. Even though the
question
may have been answered here a million times. When the
million and one comes? It should be answered as if it
was
the first time posted. Because the poster probably is
here
for the first time.
2:"Is this bad advice or a bad program or both?"
by "Greg
R" on June 4.
Your answer " Do you even know what BT...."
That was one of the "I know and you don't".
You could have explained what it is. For one...I would
like to know. Even though I will probly never need or
use
the program.
I as like many others look up to you for advice. And a
line like yours, there, was flat out frustrating.
You are a MVP here. Given that title by MS. To help
people. People who are not adept as you in Windows and
computing. The time and effort you put in as MVP is
greatly appreciated by all. And we all know that MVPs do
not get paid for thier efforts here. But you have to see
each person,here, that does not have MVP behind their
name
as an individual that needs help for their particular
problem. For their particular needs. Not someone you can
clone into your way of thinking.
The Google Search. I open two browsers. One to MSN home
page and the other to Google. Typed in both,search
windows, identically "Vxd Errors" without the quotes.
Google starts off with sites that I have never been to
or
heard of. MSN Search starts off with the MS sites that
may
have the answer.
Being a MS-MVP wouldn't it be best to direct someone to
MSN Search. After all we are talking about a MS product
here. And MSN Search results always starts with MSN or
MS
sites. Unless none are available. That is my stand on
Web
Search Engines.
Back to CIC.. I honor your feelings about it.
You...through your work here and your own preferences do
not need such a program. But that does not mean the
common
web browser like me does not. It is suggested to run
AdAware over and over again after reboots to clean
malware
off their machine if need be. CIC pro does this at one
use. And I...as for many here do not need to keep a
cookie
collection on their machine. To the commaon user cookies
take up space and cause problems. It may help in a
faster
opening of a previously visited web site. But other then
that they are useless to the common browser. And the
feature I really like about it is the deletetion of the
index.dat files. It is not my paranoia. It is a matter
of
eventual space hogging and the fact that windows will
not
let you delete them like you would cookies. They are not
needed what so ever to run or maintain the Windows
system.
Or IE for that matter. Index.dat files over a year can
get
massive. And someone running a small HD should not have
to
tolerate such a space user. When it is totally not
needed.
Tell me in your dealings with Windows,the web and IE.
What use are the index.dat files? Other then a mild form
of embedded spyware.
My self... I am,for over 30 years,an Industrial
Maintenance Tech. I work on multi-million dollar
machines
that have multi-million dollar production schedules.
When
one faulters? I have to know what to do to get it back
up
and running. And quickly.
I have to,in my mind, look through metal,miles of
wireing
and tons of electronics to come up with some form of
attack plan. It's like hitting a bullseye around a
corner.
I am very good at diagnosing with just knowing the
basic
function of the machine.
But here I am a novice. I will try to help someone if I
have experienced the same problem or simular. Or can see
the function and process of the particular hardware one
is
posting about. I then leave a reasonable assumtion of my
thoughts/findings. If I am wrong? I dearly hope some one
steps in and corrects it.
Bottom line... I do not have the knowledge base or the
backing you have. But. I do have a solid machine. No
viruses. No malware. No conflicts.
This is from being vigilant on what I deem needed to
keep
it running. Not anyone elses.
From reading your answers along with all others here.
Never going to Google to search.
Never using Outlook Express.
And daily use of CIC.
Good Day.
-----Original Message-----
I suspect I know where your venom is coming from, but
if
you are going to
make such damning statements, how about citing some
specific examples?

We usually point to other URLs only when, and because,
they are the best
answer available. We occasionally point to Google
because
it is the best
resource available for certain things. Speaking for
myself, I seldom just
send someone out to Google for an answer, for the very
reasons you cite. And
I don't know of any MVPs who do. Yes, Google is a good
research tool, but
like any other tool you have to know how to use it.
Still, I myself start
with Google *hundreds* of times a month to at least
begin
research on the
answer for someone's question in this newsgroup--heck,
Google is my home
page! So suggesting that someone might want to learn to
use it themselves
can't be *all* bad, eh?

With a significant majority of the problems I involve
myself with (including
all the repetitions), I know the answer, or at least
know
what questions to
ask that will further the process of trouble-shooting,
or
what procedures to
perform to begin a process of elimination. But for the
rest, I spend
anywhere from five to ten minutes, to hours or even
days
and weeks,
researching the issue--online with Google, the MSKB,
manufacturers' sites,
MSDN Library, books I have on the shelves, etc., or by
tracking down a
fellow MVP (and occasionally an MSFT) who might know a
bit on the subject,
or even by replicating the issue on a test machine
(though I haven't had one
handy for a couple of months.) Then I work hard to put
the proper answer
into the proper context for the person who needs it.

No, I *don't* know all the answers, though I'm *damned*
good at finding
them. But when I recognize an issue as being one I
don't
specialize in, one
that others are far more capable of dealing with, I
don't
respond. Yes, I am
occasionally wrong, sometimes horribly so. That's why
we
do things in a
group, so others can jump in and correct our mistakes,
or
add ideas,
insights and specific knowledge. We all have our
special
interests, (those
of us who know us well, or who are so unfortunate as to
have to live with us
would call them rabid obsessions), and we do our best
to
share the wealth.

While I have always thought you to be a fairly decent
chap, I'm not only
taken aback, I'm downright insulted by your
characterization of MVPs as
lording it over others. No, we don't suffer fools
gladly
sometimes (but it's
amazing how often we do), and yes, we can be downright
intense when it's our
*opinions* that are involved. But if we evince
frustration, it's not usually
with the persons themselves, it's with their lack of
skill in communicating
their issues and responding appropriately to questions
and suggestions. It's
nothing personal--the frustration is that we *can't*
help
them until they
learn to help us help them. Other sources of ongoing
and
underlying
frustration include crapware that's foisted on
unsuspecting users as being
"magic bullets", or the CDO interface at MS Support,
etc.
We try to keep
that out of our "voices", but sometimes it just leaks
through. Plus, there's
the simple matter of this communication medium being
prone to
misunderstandings. My wife and I met in a Yahoo! chat
room, and our
courtship lasted over a year using ICQ. Sometimes we
had
real arguments, but
oftentimes the problem was simply misunderstanding. As
she was (and is) wont
to say, "The problem with "Chat" is that there's
no 'Tone
of voice'."

On the other hand, there is also an unfortunate
attitude
of entitlement
among a significant number of "requesters", and that
ain't how it works.
Ask, and if someone has the answer they will be glad to
provide it. If they
don't, they will likely be more than happy to help find
it--but this is a
*peer* support forum. Users helping other users, MVPs
or
not. We're all here
to *learn*, as alien a concept as that appears to be to
many people these
days. Part of that learning process is how to help
yourself begin the
process of finding answers to your own problems and to
learn how to present
your issue to others in writing so that they are
supplied
with enough
information to go on.

Again, ppoatt, if you have some specific examples of
MVPs
malfeasance, or
whatever, please provide them. But if this is primarily
a
rant deriving from
yours and my earlier conversation on the merits of CIC,
then I suggest you
get over it. You asked me to consider a 'cleanup
utility'
that you think is
useful, and you asked it in such a way as to suggest
that
I might want to
add it to my short list of recommended useful
utilities.
I responded that
not only was I not in a position to test it at this
time,
I am also
generally opposed to such utilities on principle. You
chose to "convince"
me, and so I made my position more starkly clear. It
was
nothing personal,
and you should not take it as such. You've been around
long enough, and have
read enough of my work, that you should have already
*known* my attitude
towards such things. I don't like idiot-proofing! Heck,
I
won't even
recommend George Geyde's GEODisk, and I consider him a
friend and an
excellent provider of useful utilities. I don't know
that
there is anything
specifically problematic with GEODisk, but my
*philosophy* towards such
things is that they have the *potential* to wreak havoc
under certain
conditions. Thus, I will not recommend such utilities,
not when manual
methods are almost as easy for the user (and definitely
more enlightening)
once he or she gets a little practice.

For myself, my task here is *not* just to provide
answers-
-it's to help
people help themselves. To perhaps teach them a more
sane
approach to
computer use that leaves the world of idiot-proofing
behind.

"Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach
a
man to fish; and
you have fed him for a lifetime"-Author unknown

I verified the wording of that quote at
http://www.amatecon.com/fish.html.
It's one of a relatively few such aphorisms that I can
truly say has guided
my lifestyle. However, I think another "Improvement"
listed there was rather
apropos: "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for
today.
Teach a man to
fish; and you will not have to listen to his incessant
whining about how
hungry he is."-Author unknown

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"ppoatt" wrote in
message
. ..
Lately reading posts here. And I don't think anyone
here
is intentionally feeling this way. But the answers
from
some of the MVPs come across,to me, in their answers
as
if
they are God and anyone posting here is dirt.
If you have the answer? Say it.
Some answers read like "I know but you don't...
Nahna,Nahna,Boo,Boo."
Or the person are sent to some other URL. With no
other
explanation. "Do A Google Search" is a common one.
Sending
someone to Google is fine.
But with some of the questions posed here sending
that
person to do a search and then they follow some of the
leads from the search could be like sending a chicken
to a
Coyote Convention. Google results do not filter out
malicious web sites. And there are tons of web sites
out
there that offer fixes but are only there to hack
into,or
infect, your computer.
Like I said...if you have an answer? Say it. If you
don't
know? Say you don't know.

.

.

.

Well..PCR is always looking for another reason to have me
shot. Repeatedly in the head.
-----Original Message-----
SSSSSSHHHH!!!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"ppoatt" wrote in
message
...
I wonder why PCR has not jumped into this?

.

"ppoatt" wrote in message
...
Hi Gary,
You are a great fountain of knowledge.

Thank you.

I will just pick 2 post even though I would be able to
point out more.
1: "Password Manager suggestion needed" posted by "Big
Mac" on June5 you point counter point w/"Mostly Me"
First I thank you for some what backing me on that.
I see what "Mostly Me" said is valid and what you said is
valid.

Except that the one thing that MM specifically claimed about Autocomplete
was not true. And I simply said so.

But when it gets down to the main reasons for using
or not using something. You drop it and fall back on what
your preferences are.

After establishing the facts, what else is there?

And not what the poster may need.Or
want. I feel you are allot like my brother. If my need is
not the same as his then my need is invalid.

When did I ever say that OP's needs or wants were invalid? MM stated that
Autocomplete didn't do what it actually *does* do. Autocomplete is a tool
that is already in place. My position was, "Why add yet *another* tool to a
system if it will already do what you want it to do?" And that's my position
in a lot of these kinds of discussions. You, MM, and many others have your
way of doing things, I have mine. Why should I not add mine to the list when
the question is "What is the best way to do these things?" You claim your
tools work well and give you additional capabilities not found in Windows. I
point out that for me, those additional capabilities are unnessecary fluff,
and yes, I posit that for the OP they might be as well. I also try inject my
guiding philosophy on such things, that there is always that hidden
tradeoff---The more you add to your system, the more there is that can go
wrong.

You may need the few cookies and such on your machine or
not need the password recall. But others may need the
password recall and not need the cookies. Each post is an
individual with differant needs. Even though the question
may have been answered here a million times. When the
million and one comes? It should be answered as if it was
the first time posted. Because the poster probably is here
for the first time.

That's a bit of a rambling statement. I'll try. Cookies and password
recall--and for that matter many other somewhat related items like Recent
URLs, History, Recent Docs, MRUs, etc.--these are all meant to be tools that
help the *user*--that save time and effort. Alas, they are widely
misunderstood tools. My point is that when understood and used properly,
they *are* timesavers--they help me immensely, all the time. But they have
all become bugaboos and grist for the advertising of "Cleanup" utilities
masquerading as Security apps. Granted, that is in great part due to the
ever-present truth that one person's functionality is another's
backdoor--but IE has come a long way in maintianing those great
funcionlities while also closing the backdoors. If your system is properly
secured, and you use the tools properly, there is no need for what TUI
honestly describes as "Paranoia" functions. And *none* of them are in the
least bit space-hogging. Even TIFs are not space-hogging if you set the
parameters correctly, and Index.dat does *not* just keep growing and
growing. Part of my "philosophy" on helpr tools such as those discussed
further down is that they are often the *cause* of problems in IE
functionality, not the cure.

2:"Is this bad advice or a bad program or both?" by "Greg
R" on June 4.
Your answer " Do you even know what BT...."
That was one of the "I know and you don't".

No it wasn't. I didn't know the first thing about BT, not even that it
existed, until I read that post and then did some research. The
documentation is so easy to find and so well laid out that it took me ten
minutes, fifteen at the most, to fully grasp the details. Greg was claiming
that BT documentation suggested a procedure that it clearly does not. His
statements also clearly suggested that he did not understand the function
and goals of BT in the first place. Both Richard's and my posts were
not-so-gentle suggestions that Greg RTM before asking others to interpret
that "M" and comment on the procedures contained therein. In my case, (I
can't speak for Richard), this particular conversation occurred in the
context of other posts from Greg that clearly showed that he doesn't spend
much time or effort on the methodical. His posts are vague and scattered in
nature, which makes it very difficult to deal with them in any sane manner.
My reponses have been aimed at trying to get him to organize his thoughts,
at least the ones he posts here.

You could have explained what it is. For one...I would
like to know. Even though I will probly never need or use
the program.

Read and learn. The links were included in the thread and they explain it
all far better than I will ever be able to. Really, the documentation of BT
is quite good. Took me no time at all to grasp the idea.

I as like many others look up to you for advice. And a
line like yours, there, was flat out frustrating.

How so?

You are a MVP here. Given that title by MS. To help
people.

Yes, I'm an MVP. Yes, the Award is given by MS.

*NO*, it is not "to help people"! It is recognition for *having_helped*
people. I am not hired, bribed or even cajoled by MS to remain in these
newsgroups and help people, and I am not required to toe any particular
party line (though I am permitted access to information that isn't publicly
known under the terms of a Non-Disclosure Agreement--the only contract I
have with MS other than EULAs.) I'm here because I enjoy what I do. Because
*I* learn as much or more by doing it than the people I'm "helping". I was
doing it for quite a while before being Awarded, I'm always at least mildly
surprised (sometimes quite surprised) when I'm Awarded again, and I'll be
here long after MS decides to stop giving the Award to me if they so choose.

People who are not adept as you in Windows and
computing. The time and effort you put in as MVP is
greatly appreciated by all. And we all know that MVPs do
not get paid for thier efforts here. But you have to see
each person,here, that does not have MVP behind their name
as an individual that needs help for their particular
problem. For their particular needs. Not someone you can
clone into your way of thinking.

Let's see. I'm knowledgable, I'm helpful, and I have a lot of experience
with Windows, particularly with helping other people use Windows. And I
should not explain in great gory detail the way *I* use Windows? The way I
have taught many others to use Windows, with such success that they seldom
call me to fix their systems anymore?

Jjust because you feel itimidated by my opinions doesn't mean that my intent
is to intimidate you. My intent is to present alternatives and to debate the
issues on their merits. If you can't or won't defend your opinions, that's
not *my* problem. But to suggest that adding yet *more* layers of utilities
to a stressed system in order to destress it... Or to add ten million more
options to a system in order to simplify life... Or to use a "tool" to do
something that simply does not need to be done and quite possibly
*shouldn't* be done--often based upon entirely fallacious understandings of
the way Windows works in the first place....

Hey, sometimes those are valid suggestions, but they strike me as too
internally contradictory to be taken for granted.

The Google Search. I open two browsers. One to MSN home
page and the other to Google. Typed in both,search
windows, identically "Vxd Errors" without the quotes.
Google starts off with sites that I have never been to or
heard of. MSN Search starts off with the MS sites that may
have the answer.
Being a MS-MVP wouldn't it be best to direct someone to
MSN Search. After all we are talking about a MS product
here. And MSN Search results always starts with MSN or MS
sites. Unless none are available. That is my stand on Web
Search Engines.

I don't permit MSN on my machines. It's an ABOMINATION! However, I *do* use
Microsoft.com, the MSKB and the MSDN Library, religiously. And whenever I
recommend research methods, those are always included. But not even
Microsoft.com is going to help me with an error in HPZIO100.DLL or any one
of thousands of viruses, bogus filnames that belong to viruses, parasites
and such. Nor will MS pages provide me any hits on hardware specs, etc. I
tend toward Google first because it usually makes very clear whether or not
the issue is a purely MS issue or not. If it is, you'll see KB articles
right at the top.

No, we are usually *not* just dealing with MS products here. Far from it.
Windows 98 is just the platform upon which the rest of it happens. Some of
the fixes are purely internal to Windows and IE/OE, etc., some are not. Some
of the causes of the problems addressed here are strictly "in-house"--most
are not. *My_opinion* is that you do yourself a great disservice with your
"stand on Web Search Engines."

Back to CIC.. I honor your feelings about it.

But you didn't. You responded with the diatribe that began this
conversation.

You...through your work here and your own preferences do
not need such a program. But that does not mean the common
web browser like me does not.

Sure it does. You may not *want* to use manual methods, you may like your
tool, but that does not in any way mean that you "need" it. In any case, I
never said that you shouldn't use it (even if I happen to think that's
true). I stated that *I* wouldn't use it, it's against my philosophy, and
that I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone else, both because it goes
against my philosophy *and* because it's my experience that such utilities
are notoriuos for causing minor problems to blossom into full-blown
disasters--not often, grant you, but the potential exists.

It is suggested to run
AdAware over and over again after reboots to clean malware
off their machine if need be. CIC pro does this at one
use.

It does?!?! I don't recall your saying anything about CIC being a
adware/spyware cleaner! In any case, once a machine is cleaned up, using
AdAware et al, and assuming you then institute proper Security measures,
re-running them once every week or two should be a pro-forma exercise.
Unless some spectacular new vulnerability manages to catch you off-guard,
the scans should turn up zilch. They do for me.

And I...as for many here do not need to keep a cookie
collection on their machine. To the commaon user cookies
take up space and cause problems. It may help in a faster
opening of a previously visited web site. But other then
that they are useless to the common browser.

I submit that you don't understand the function of Cookies. They certainly
do not help pages open faster. They *do*, when I permit them, remember who I
am, what my preferences are, and allow me to navigate through various
procedures. They also allow sites to keep track of me for marketing
purposes, but since I block most of the annoying aspects of advertising,
anyway, who cares? They also allow sites to track their own internal
efficiency, providing, in a sense, automatic feedback, and as far as I'm
concerned, that's a good thing. But I *only* permit permanent Cookies on
sites I trust. Even if I choose to temporarily allow permanent Cookies on
some particular site that I'd rather not, for teh sake of expediency, it's a
simple matter to revoke that permission. Even easier is to permanently block
Cookies out of habit, then go back and change a site's permissions ifI
discover some functionlitiy that I want needs them.

And the
feature I really like about it is the deletetion of the
index.dat files. It is not my paranoia. It is a matter of
eventual space hogging and the fact that windows will not
let you delete them like you would cookies. They are not
needed what so ever to run or maintain the Windows system.
Or IE for that matter. Index.dat files over a year can get
massive. And someone running a small HD should not have to
tolerate such a space user. When it is totally not needed.
Tell me in your dealings with Windows,the web and IE.
What use are the index.dat files? Other then a mild form
of embedded spyware.

Again, you totally misunderstand the purpose of Index.dat files. They are
used internally by IE to manage the TIF, Cookies, History and other
databases, databases which consist of files that are *managed* by the
relevant Index.dat file. That's how the whole system works. And you're
wrong. Aside from real errors--when functioning properly--Index.dat files
grow to a certain size and then maintain that size indefinitely. You don't
need another tool to manage those things, you need to properly use the tools
already present. Yes, *if* an intruder can gain access to those files they
can learn a lot about you--that's true about a lot of other files in your
system. But "spyware"? Hey, if they got in far enough to read that stuff,
you've got bigger problems.

As for space hogging in general. Why is it that people think they can keep
piling on newer and better software and not have to upgrade the underlying
hardware? I don't get it. And don't twist my words--I'm not saying they
don't "need" the newer and better software, most of them do. But they just
as much "need" newer and better hardware. That's life in the cyberlane.

My self... I am,for over 30 years,an Industrial
Maintenance Tech. I work on multi-million dollar machines
that have multi-million dollar production schedules. When
one faulters? I have to know what to do to get it back up
and running. And quickly.
I have to,in my mind, look through metal,miles of wireing
and tons of electronics to come up with some form of
attack plan. It's like hitting a bullseye around a corner.
I am very good at diagnosing with just knowing the basic
function of the machine.

I've noticed that you have that kind of mind. Not unlike my own talents in
similar endeavors.

But here I am a novice. I will try to help someone if I
have experienced the same problem or simular. Or can see
the function and process of the particular hardware one is
posting about. I then leave a reasonable assumtion of my
thoughts/findings. If I am wrong? I dearly hope some one
steps in and corrects it.
Bottom line... I do not have the knowledge base or the
backing you have. But. I do have a solid machine. No
viruses. No malware. No conflicts.
This is from being vigilant on what I deem needed to keep
it running. Not anyone elses.

Great! I applaud you and appreciate your participation here. I always have.
But why should *I* adopt your methods? Or suggest them to anyone else? And
why should I not suggest to you that in some ways you could do better?

From reading your answers along with all others here.

Glad to be of service.

Never going to Google to search.

You're robbing yourself of a rich resource. Please reconsider.

Never using Outlook Express.

Greatest email/news program in the world!

And daily use of CIC.

That horse has been beaten enough for now, s.

Good Day.

Ciao!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

Mike,

You are an ignorant, mean and despicable character. Please go away.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Moron!

-----Original Message-----
To Gary S. Terhune, wish I had this advantage
I use my own then figure out the cure. Haven't
far enough to totally crash yet!! and I only
do this with what I think is an OS problem or
maintenance problem. Try to post simple instructions
is also my priority because you never know
how technical inclined the other party is.



Snip

-----Original Message-----

or even by replicating the issue on a test machine
(though
I haven't had one
handy for a couple of months.)

.

Thanks for the well thought answers. Helpful.
Comes down to "What floats your Boat"
Like some people fly to their destination. Others drive a
car to the same place. Hopefully they both get there
safely. But one method just takes longer.
I prefer to drive.
-----Original Message-----
"ppoatt" wrote in
message
...
Hi Gary,
You are a great fountain of knowledge.

Thank you.

I will just pick 2 post even though I would be able to
point out more.
1: "Password Manager suggestion needed" posted by "Big
Mac" on June5 you point counter point w/"Mostly Me"
First I thank you for some what backing me on that.
I see what "Mostly Me" said is valid and what you said
is
valid.

Except that the one thing that MM specifically claimed
about Autocomplete
was not true. And I simply said so.

But when it gets down to the main reasons for using
or not using something. You drop it and fall back on
what
your preferences are.

After establishing the facts, what else is there?

And not what the poster may need.Or
want. I feel you are allot like my brother. If my need
is
not the same as his then my need is invalid.

When did I ever say that OP's needs or wants were
invalid? MM stated that
Autocomplete didn't do what it actually *does* do.
Autocomplete is a tool
that is already in place. My position was, "Why add yet
*another* tool to a
system if it will already do what you want it to do?" And
that's my position
in a lot of these kinds of discussions. You, MM, and many
others have your
way of doing things, I have mine. Why should I not add
mine to the list when
the question is "What is the best way to do these
things?" You claim your
tools work well and give you additional capabilities not
found in Windows. I
point out that for me, those additional capabilities are
unnessecary fluff,
and yes, I posit that for the OP they might be as well. I
also try inject my
guiding philosophy on such things, that there is always
that hidden
tradeoff---The more you add to your system, the more
there is that can go
wrong.

You may need the few cookies and such on your machine
or
not need the password recall. But others may need the
password recall and not need the cookies. Each post is
an
individual with differant needs. Even though the
question
may have been answered here a million times. When the
million and one comes? It should be answered as if it
was
the first time posted. Because the poster probably is
here
for the first time.

That's a bit of a rambling statement. I'll try. Cookies
and password
recall--and for that matter many other somewhat related
items like Recent
URLs, History, Recent Docs, MRUs, etc.--these are all
meant to be tools that
help the *user*--that save time and effort. Alas, they
are widely
misunderstood tools. My point is that when understood and
used properly,
they *are* timesavers--they help me immensely, all the
time. But they have
all become bugaboos and grist for the advertising
of "Cleanup" utilities
masquerading as Security apps. Granted, that is in great
part due to the
ever-present truth that one person's functionality is
another's
backdoor--but IE has come a long way in maintianing those
great
funcionlities while also closing the backdoors. If your
system is properly
secured, and you use the tools properly, there is no need
for what TUI
honestly describes as "Paranoia" functions. And *none* of
them are in the
least bit space-hogging. Even TIFs are not space-hogging
if you set the
parameters correctly, and Index.dat does *not* just keep
growing and
growing. Part of my "philosophy" on helpr tools such as
those discussed
further down is that they are often the *cause* of
problems in IE
functionality, not the cure.

2:"Is this bad advice or a bad program or both?"
by "Greg
R" on June 4.
Your answer " Do you even know what BT...."
That was one of the "I know and you don't".

No it wasn't. I didn't know the first thing about BT, not
even that it
existed, until I read that post and then did some
research. The
documentation is so easy to find and so well laid out
that it took me ten
minutes, fifteen at the most, to fully grasp the details.
Greg was claiming
that BT documentation suggested a procedure that it
clearly does not. His
statements also clearly suggested that he did not
understand the function
and goals of BT in the first place. Both Richard's and my
posts were
not-so-gentle suggestions that Greg RTM before asking
others to interpret
that "M" and comment on the procedures contained therein.
In my case, (I
can't speak for Richard), this particular conversation
occurred in the
context of other posts from Greg that clearly showed that
he doesn't spend
much time or effort on the methodical. His posts are
vague and scattered in
nature, which makes it very difficult to deal with them
in any sane manner.
My reponses have been aimed at trying to get him to
organize his thoughts,
at least the ones he posts here.

You could have explained what it is. For one...I would
like to know. Even though I will probly never need or
use
the program.

Read and learn. The links were included in the thread and
they explain it
all far better than I will ever be able to. Really, the
documentation of BT
is quite good. Took me no time at all to grasp the idea.

I as like many others look up to you for advice. And a
line like yours, there, was flat out frustrating.

How so?

You are a MVP here. Given that title by MS. To help
people.

Yes, I'm an MVP. Yes, the Award is given by MS.

*NO*, it is not "to help people"! It is recognition for
*having_helped*
people. I am not hired, bribed or even cajoled by MS to
remain in these
newsgroups and help people, and I am not required to toe
any particular
party line (though I am permitted access to information
that isn't publicly
known under the terms of a Non-Disclosure Agreement--the
only contract I
have with MS other than EULAs.) I'm here because I enjoy
what I do. Because
*I* learn as much or more by doing it than the people
I'm "helping". I was
doing it for quite a while before being Awarded, I'm
always at least mildly
surprised (sometimes quite surprised) when I'm Awarded
again, and I'll be
here long after MS decides to stop giving the Award to me
if they so choose.

People who are not adept as you in Windows and
computing. The time and effort you put in as MVP is
greatly appreciated by all. And we all know that MVPs do
not get paid for thier efforts here. But you have to see
each person,here, that does not have MVP behind their
name
as an individual that needs help for their particular
problem. For their particular needs. Not someone you can
clone into your way of thinking.

Let's see. I'm knowledgable, I'm helpful, and I have a
lot of experience
with Windows, particularly with helping other people use
Windows. And I
should not explain in great gory detail the way *I* use
Windows? The way I
have taught many others to use Windows, with such success
that they seldom
call me to fix their systems anymore?

Jjust because you feel itimidated by my opinions doesn't
mean that my intent
is to intimidate you. My intent is to present
alternatives and to debate the
issues on their merits. If you can't or won't defend your
opinions, that's
not *my* problem. But to suggest that adding yet *more*
layers of utilities
to a stressed system in order to destress it... Or to add
ten million more
options to a system in order to simplify life... Or to
use a "tool" to do
something that simply does not need to be done and quite
possibly
*shouldn't* be done--often based upon entirely fallacious
understandings of
the way Windows works in the first place....

Hey, sometimes those are valid suggestions, but they
strike me as too
internally contradictory to be taken for granted.

The Google Search. I open two browsers. One to MSN home
page and the other to Google. Typed in both,search
windows, identically "Vxd Errors" without the quotes.
Google starts off with sites that I have never been to
or
heard of. MSN Search starts off with the MS sites that
may
have the answer.
Being a MS-MVP wouldn't it be best to direct someone to
MSN Search. After all we are talking about a MS product
here. And MSN Search results always starts with MSN or
MS
sites. Unless none are available. That is my stand on
Web
Search Engines.

I don't permit MSN on my machines. It's an ABOMINATION!
However, I *do* use
Microsoft.com, the MSKB and the MSDN Library,
religiously. And whenever I
recommend research methods, those are always included.
But not even
Microsoft.com is going to help me with an error in
HPZIO100.DLL or any one
of thousands of viruses, bogus filnames that belong to
viruses, parasites
and such. Nor will MS pages provide me any hits on
hardware specs, etc. I
tend toward Google first because it usually makes very
clear whether or not
the issue is a purely MS issue or not. If it is, you'll
see KB articles
right at the top.

No, we are usually *not* just dealing with MS products
here. Far from it.
Windows 98 is just the platform upon which the rest of it
happens. Some of
the fixes are purely internal to Windows and IE/OE, etc.,
some are not. Some
of the causes of the problems addressed here are
strictly "in-house"--most
are not. *My_opinion* is that you do yourself a great
disservice with your
"stand on Web Search Engines."

Back to CIC.. I honor your feelings about it.

But you didn't. You responded with the diatribe that
began this
conversation.

You...through your work here and your own preferences do
not need such a program. But that does not mean the
common
web browser like me does not.

Sure it does. You may not *want* to use manual methods,
you may like your
tool, but that does not in any way mean that you "need"
it. In any case, I
never said that you shouldn't use it (even if I happen to
think that's
true). I stated that *I* wouldn't use it, it's against my
philosophy, and
that I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone else,
both because it goes
against my philosophy *and* because it's my experience
that such utilities
are notoriuos for causing minor problems to blossom into
full-blown
disasters--not often, grant you, but the potential exists.

It is suggested to run
AdAware over and over again after reboots to clean
malware
off their machine if need be. CIC pro does this at one
use.

It does?!?! I don't recall your saying anything about CIC
being a
adware/spyware cleaner! In any case, once a machine is
cleaned up, using
AdAware et al, and assuming you then institute proper
Security measures,
re-running them once every week or two should be a pro-
forma exercise.
Unless some spectacular new vulnerability manages to
catch you off-guard,
the scans should turn up zilch. They do for me.

And I...as for many here do not need to keep a cookie
collection on their machine. To the commaon user cookies
take up space and cause problems. It may help in a
faster
opening of a previously visited web site. But other then
that they are useless to the common browser.

I submit that you don't understand the function of
Cookies. They certainly
do not help pages open faster. They *do*, when I permit
them, remember who I
am, what my preferences are, and allow me to navigate
through various
procedures. They also allow sites to keep track of me for
marketing
purposes, but since I block most of the annoying aspects
of advertising,
anyway, who cares? They also allow sites to track their
own internal
efficiency, providing, in a sense, automatic feedback,
and as far as I'm
concerned, that's a good thing. But I *only* permit
permanent Cookies on
sites I trust. Even if I choose to temporarily allow
permanent Cookies on
some particular site that I'd rather not, for teh sake of
expediency, it's a
simple matter to revoke that permission. Even easier is
to permanently block
Cookies out of habit, then go back and change a site's
permissions ifI
discover some functionlitiy that I want needs them.

And the
feature I really like about it is the deletetion of the
index.dat files. It is not my paranoia. It is a matter
of
eventual space hogging and the fact that windows will
not
let you delete them like you would cookies. They are not
needed what so ever to run or maintain the Windows
system.
Or IE for that matter. Index.dat files over a year can
get
massive. And someone running a small HD should not have
to
tolerate such a space user. When it is totally not
needed.
Tell me in your dealings with Windows,the web and IE.
What use are the index.dat files? Other then a mild form
of embedded spyware.

Again, you totally misunderstand the purpose of Index.dat
files. They are
used internally by IE to manage the TIF, Cookies, History
and other
databases, databases which consist of files that are
*managed* by the
relevant Index.dat file. That's how the whole system
works. And you're
wrong. Aside from real errors--when functioning properly--
Index.dat files
grow to a certain size and then maintain that size
indefinitely. You don't
need another tool to manage those things, you need to
properly use the tools
already present. Yes, *if* an intruder can gain access to
those files they
can learn a lot about you--that's true about a lot of
other files in your
system. But "spyware"? Hey, if they got in far enough to
read that stuff,
you've got bigger problems.

As for space hogging in general. Why is it that people
think they can keep
piling on newer and better software and not have to
upgrade the underlying
hardware? I don't get it. And don't twist my words--I'm
not saying they
don't "need" the newer and better software, most of them
do. But they just
as much "need" newer and better hardware. That's life in
the cyberlane.

My self... I am,for over 30 years,an Industrial
Maintenance Tech. I work on multi-million dollar
machines
that have multi-million dollar production schedules.
When
one faulters? I have to know what to do to get it back
up
and running. And quickly.
I have to,in my mind, look through metal,miles of
wireing
and tons of electronics to come up with some form of
attack plan. It's like hitting a bullseye around a
corner.
I am very good at diagnosing with just knowing the
basic
function of the machine.

I've noticed that you have that kind of mind. Not unlike
my own talents in
similar endeavors.

But here I am a novice. I will try to help someone if I
have experienced the same problem or simular. Or can see
the function and process of the particular hardware one
is
posting about. I then leave a reasonable assumtion of my
thoughts/findings. If I am wrong? I dearly hope some one
steps in and corrects it.
Bottom line... I do not have the knowledge base or the
backing you have. But. I do have a solid machine. No
viruses. No malware. No conflicts.
This is from being vigilant on what I deem needed to
keep
it running. Not anyone elses.

Great! I applaud you and appreciate your participation
here. I always have.
But why should *I* adopt your methods? Or suggest them to
anyone else? And
why should I not suggest to you that in some ways you
could do better?

From reading your answers along with all others here.

Glad to be of service.

Never going to Google to search.

You're robbing yourself of a rich resource. Please
reconsider.

Never using Outlook Express.

Greatest email/news program in the world!

And daily use of CIC.

That horse has been beaten enough for now, s.

Good Day.

Ciao!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x


.

I never said "repeatedly". After the first shot, I would have to respect
the dead & not desecrate your corpse, ppoatt! I think you know that!

Wait a minute! I don't think I actually ever said it at all. I would
never say anything like that! Don't make me ask the MVP wizards to put a
spell on you!

And there's nothing wrong with posting a Google "Groups" search; that
one only goes to NGs! However, there may be an MVP/two that might fit
your description of them, but I can say no more until I find my garlic
necklace.


--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
should things get worse after this,
PCR

"ppoatt" wrote in message
...
| Well..PCR is always looking for another reason to have me
| shot. Repeatedly in the head.
| -----Original Message-----
| SSSSSSHHHH!!!
|
| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS MVP for Win9x
|
| "ppoatt" wrote in
| message
| ...
| I wonder why PCR has not jumped into this?
|
| .
|

"knowledge" is not the only thing that spews from that
fountain!

-----Original Message-----
"ppoatt" wrote in
message
...
Hi Gary,
You are a great fountain of knowledge.

Thank you.

I will just pick 2 post even though I would be able to
point out more.
1: "Password Manager suggestion needed" posted by "Big
Mac" on June5 you point counter point w/"Mostly Me"
First I thank you for some what backing me on that.
I see what "Mostly Me" said is valid and what you said
is
valid.

Except that the one thing that MM specifically claimed
about Autocomplete
was not true. And I simply said so.

But when it gets down to the main reasons for using
or not using something. You drop it and fall back on
what
your preferences are.

After establishing the facts, what else is there?

And not what the poster may need.Or
want. I feel you are allot like my brother. If my need
is
not the same as his then my need is invalid.

When did I ever say that OP's needs or wants were
invalid? MM stated that
Autocomplete didn't do what it actually *does* do.
Autocomplete is a tool
that is already in place. My position was, "Why add yet
*another* tool to a
system if it will already do what you want it to do?" And
that's my position
in a lot of these kinds of discussions. You, MM, and many
others have your
way of doing things, I have mine. Why should I not add
mine to the list when
the question is "What is the best way to do these
things?" You claim your
tools work well and give you additional capabilities not
found in Windows. I
point out that for me, those additional capabilities are
unnessecary fluff,
and yes, I posit that for the OP they might be as well. I
also try inject my
guiding philosophy on such things, that there is always
that hidden
tradeoff---The more you add to your system, the more
there is that can go
wrong.

You may need the few cookies and such on your machine
or
not need the password recall. But others may need the
password recall and not need the cookies. Each post is
an
individual with differant needs. Even though the
question
may have been answered here a million times. When the
million and one comes? It should be answered as if it
was
the first time posted. Because the poster probably is
here
for the first time.

That's a bit of a rambling statement. I'll try. Cookies
and password
recall--and for that matter many other somewhat related
items like Recent
URLs, History, Recent Docs, MRUs, etc.--these are all
meant to be tools that
help the *user*--that save time and effort. Alas, they
are widely
misunderstood tools. My point is that when understood and
used properly,
they *are* timesavers--they help me immensely, all the
time. But they have
all become bugaboos and grist for the advertising
of "Cleanup" utilities
masquerading as Security apps. Granted, that is in great
part due to the
ever-present truth that one person's functionality is
another's
backdoor--but IE has come a long way in maintianing those
great
funcionlities while also closing the backdoors. If your
system is properly
secured, and you use the tools properly, there is no need
for what TUI
honestly describes as "Paranoia" functions. And *none* of
them are in the
least bit space-hogging. Even TIFs are not space-hogging
if you set the
parameters correctly, and Index.dat does *not* just keep
growing and
growing. Part of my "philosophy" on helpr tools such as
those discussed
further down is that they are often the *cause* of
problems in IE
functionality, not the cure.

2:"Is this bad advice or a bad program or both?"
by "Greg
R" on June 4.
Your answer " Do you even know what BT...."
That was one of the "I know and you don't".

No it wasn't. I didn't know the first thing about BT, not
even that it
existed, until I read that post and then did some
research. The
documentation is so easy to find and so well laid out
that it took me ten
minutes, fifteen at the most, to fully grasp the details.
Greg was claiming
that BT documentation suggested a procedure that it
clearly does not. His
statements also clearly suggested that he did not
understand the function
and goals of BT in the first place. Both Richard's and my
posts were
not-so-gentle suggestions that Greg RTM before asking
others to interpret
that "M" and comment on the procedures contained therein.
In my case, (I
can't speak for Richard), this particular conversation
occurred in the
context of other posts from Greg that clearly showed that
he doesn't spend
much time or effort on the methodical. His posts are
vague and scattered in
nature, which makes it very difficult to deal with them
in any sane manner.
My reponses have been aimed at trying to get him to
organize his thoughts,
at least the ones he posts here.

You could have explained what it is. For one...I would
like to know. Even though I will probly never need or
use
the program.

Read and learn. The links were included in the thread and
they explain it
all far better than I will ever be able to. Really, the
documentation of BT
is quite good. Took me no time at all to grasp the idea.

I as like many others look up to you for advice. And a
line like yours, there, was flat out frustrating.

How so?

You are a MVP here. Given that title by MS. To help
people.

Yes, I'm an MVP. Yes, the Award is given by MS.

*NO*, it is not "to help people"! It is recognition for
*having_helped*
people. I am not hired, bribed or even cajoled by MS to
remain in these
newsgroups and help people, and I am not required to toe
any particular
party line (though I am permitted access to information
that isn't publicly
known under the terms of a Non-Disclosure Agreement--the
only contract I
have with MS other than EULAs.) I'm here because I enjoy
what I do. Because
*I* learn as much or more by doing it than the people
I'm "helping". I was
doing it for quite a while before being Awarded, I'm
always at least mildly
surprised (sometimes quite surprised) when I'm Awarded
again, and I'll be
here long after MS decides to stop giving the Award to me
if they so choose.

People who are not adept as you in Windows and
computing. The time and effort you put in as MVP is
greatly appreciated by all. And we all know that MVPs do
not get paid for thier efforts here. But you have to see
each person,here, that does not have MVP behind their
name
as an individual that needs help for their particular
problem. For their particular needs. Not someone you can
clone into your way of thinking.

Let's see. I'm knowledgable, I'm helpful, and I have a
lot of experience
with Windows, particularly with helping other people use
Windows. And I
should not explain in great gory detail the way *I* use
Windows? The way I
have taught many others to use Windows, with such success
that they seldom
call me to fix their systems anymore?

Jjust because you feel itimidated by my opinions doesn't
mean that my intent
is to intimidate you. My intent is to present
alternatives and to debate the
issues on their merits. If you can't or won't defend your
opinions, that's
not *my* problem. But to suggest that adding yet *more*
layers of utilities
to a stressed system in order to destress it... Or to add
ten million more
options to a system in order to simplify life... Or to
use a "tool" to do
something that simply does not need to be done and quite
possibly
*shouldn't* be done--often based upon entirely fallacious
understandings of
the way Windows works in the first place....

Hey, sometimes those are valid suggestions, but they
strike me as too
internally contradictory to be taken for granted.

The Google Search. I open two browsers. One to MSN home
page and the other to Google. Typed in both,search
windows, identically "Vxd Errors" without the quotes.
Google starts off with sites that I have never been to
or
heard of. MSN Search starts off with the MS sites that
may
have the answer.
Being a MS-MVP wouldn't it be best to direct someone to
MSN Search. After all we are talking about a MS product
here. And MSN Search results always starts with MSN or
MS
sites. Unless none are available. That is my stand on
Web
Search Engines.

I don't permit MSN on my machines. It's an ABOMINATION!
However, I *do* use
Microsoft.com, the MSKB and the MSDN Library,
religiously. And whenever I
recommend research methods, those are always included.
But not even
Microsoft.com is going to help me with an error in
HPZIO100.DLL or any one
of thousands of viruses, bogus filnames that belong to
viruses, parasites
and such. Nor will MS pages provide me any hits on
hardware specs, etc. I
tend toward Google first because it usually makes very
clear whether or not
the issue is a purely MS issue or not. If it is, you'll
see KB articles
right at the top.

No, we are usually *not* just dealing with MS products
here. Far from it.
Windows 98 is just the platform upon which the rest of it
happens. Some of
the fixes are purely internal to Windows and IE/OE, etc.,
some are not. Some
of the causes of the problems addressed here are
strictly "in-house"--most
are not. *My_opinion* is that you do yourself a great
disservice with your
"stand on Web Search Engines."

Back to CIC.. I honor your feelings about it.

But you didn't. You responded with the diatribe that
began this
conversation.

You...through your work here and your own preferences do
not need such a program. But that does not mean the
common
web browser like me does not.

Sure it does. You may not *want* to use manual methods,
you may like your
tool, but that does not in any way mean that you "need"
it. In any case, I
never said that you shouldn't use it (even if I happen to
think that's
true). I stated that *I* wouldn't use it, it's against my
philosophy, and
that I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone else,
both because it goes
against my philosophy *and* because it's my experience
that such utilities
are notoriuos for causing minor problems to blossom into
full-blown
disasters--not often, grant you, but the potential exists.

It is suggested to run
AdAware over and over again after reboots to clean
malware
off their machine if need be. CIC pro does this at one
use.

It does?!?! I don't recall your saying anything about CIC
being a
adware/spyware cleaner! In any case, once a machine is
cleaned up, using
AdAware et al, and assuming you then institute proper
Security measures,
re-running them once every week or two should be a pro-
forma exercise.
Unless some spectacular new vulnerability manages to
catch you off-guard,
the scans should turn up zilch. They do for me.

And I...as for many here do not need to keep a cookie
collection on their machine. To the commaon user cookies
take up space and cause problems. It may help in a
faster
opening of a previously visited web site. But other then
that they are useless to the common browser.

I submit that you don't understand the function of
Cookies. They certainly
do not help pages open faster. They *do*, when I permit
them, remember who I
am, what my preferences are, and allow me to navigate
through various
procedures. They also allow sites to keep track of me for
marketing
purposes, but since I block most of the annoying aspects
of advertising,
anyway, who cares? They also allow sites to track their
own internal
efficiency, providing, in a sense, automatic feedback,
and as far as I'm
concerned, that's a good thing. But I *only* permit
permanent Cookies on
sites I trust. Even if I choose to temporarily allow
permanent Cookies on
some particular site that I'd rather not, for teh sake of
expediency, it's a
simple matter to revoke that permission. Even easier is
to permanently block
Cookies out of habit, then go back and change a site's
permissions ifI
discover some functionlitiy that I want needs them.

And the
feature I really like about it is the deletetion of the
index.dat files. It is not my paranoia. It is a matter
of
eventual space hogging and the fact that windows will
not
let you delete them like you would cookies. They are not
needed what so ever to run or maintain the Windows
system.
Or IE for that matter. Index.dat files over a year can
get
massive. And someone running a small HD should not have
to
tolerate such a space user. When it is totally not
needed.
Tell me in your dealings with Windows,the web and IE.
What use are the index.dat files? Other then a mild form
of embedded spyware.

Again, you totally misunderstand the purpose of Index.dat
files. They are
used internally by IE to manage the TIF, Cookies, History
and other
databases, databases which consist of files that are
*managed* by the
relevant Index.dat file. That's how the whole system
works. And you're
wrong. Aside from real errors--when functioning properly--
Index.dat files
grow to a certain size and then maintain that size
indefinitely. You don't
need another tool to manage those things, you need to
properly use the tools
already present. Yes, *if* an intruder can gain access to
those files they
can learn a lot about you--that's true about a lot of
other files in your
system. But "spyware"? Hey, if they got in far enough to
read that stuff,
you've got bigger problems.

As for space hogging in general. Why is it that people
think they can keep
piling on newer and better software and not have to
upgrade the underlying
hardware? I don't get it. And don't twist my words--I'm
not saying they
don't "need" the newer and better software, most of them
do. But they just
as much "need" newer and better hardware. That's life in
the cyberlane.

My self... I am,for over 30 years,an Industrial
Maintenance Tech. I work on multi-million dollar
machines
that have multi-million dollar production schedules.
When
one faulters? I have to know what to do to get it back
up
and running. And quickly.
I have to,in my mind, look through metal,miles of
wireing
and tons of electronics to come up with some form of
attack plan. It's like hitting a bullseye around a
corner.
I am very good at diagnosing with just knowing the
basic
function of the machine.

I've noticed that you have that kind of mind. Not unlike
my own talents in
similar endeavors.

But here I am a novice. I will try to help someone if I
have experienced the same problem or simular. Or can see
the function and process of the particular hardware one
is
posting about. I then leave a reasonable assumtion of my
thoughts/findings. If I am wrong? I dearly hope some one
steps in and corrects it.
Bottom line... I do not have the knowledge base or the
backing you have. But. I do have a solid machine. No
viruses. No malware. No conflicts.
This is from being vigilant on what I deem needed to
keep
it running. Not anyone elses.

Great! I applaud you and appreciate your participation
here. I always have.
But why should *I* adopt your methods? Or suggest them to
anyone else? And
why should I not suggest to you that in some ways you
could do better?

From reading your answers along with all others here.

Glad to be of service.

Never going to Google to search.

You're robbing yourself of a rich resource. Please
reconsider.

Never using Outlook Express.

Greatest email/news program in the world!

And daily use of CIC.

That horse has been beaten enough for now, s.

Good Day.

Ciao!

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x


.

Such a pithy statement from a faceless coward. And you trim well, too.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP for Win9x

wrote in message
...
"knowledge" is not the only thing that spews from that
fountain!

-----Original Message-----
"ppoatt" wrote in
message
...
Hi Gary,
You are a great fountain of knowledge.

Posting simple instructions is good generally. But, it has its pitfalls
too.
wrote in message
...
To Gary S. Terhune, wish I had this advantage
I use my own then figure out the cure. Haven't
far enough to totally crash yet!! and I only
do this with what I think is an OS problem or
maintenance problem. Try to post simple instructions
is also my priority because you never know
how technical inclined the other party is.



Snip

-----Original Message-----

or even by replicating the issue on a test machine (though
I haven't had one
handy for a couple of months.)