Application installs fail in W2K

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003.

  1. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Hi all

    Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.

    I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    memory, but no processor time.

    Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    that my 'temp' directories are empty

    Cheers
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Eden

    Brian H¹© Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes
    Paul Eden said:

    > Hi all
    >
    > Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >
    > I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    > install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    > nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    > memory, but no processor time.
    >
    > Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    > that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >
    > Cheers


    Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    Brian H¹©, Aug 9, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Eden

    Brian H¹© Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes
    °Mike° said:

    > On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    > <nx6Za.8092$>
    > Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >
    >> X-No-Archive: Yes
    >> Paul Eden said:
    >>
    >>> Hi all
    >>>
    >>> Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>
    >>> I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>> install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>> nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>> memory, but no processor time.
    >>>
    >>> Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>> that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>
    >>> Cheers

    >>
    >> Have you turned off your anti-virus?

    >
    > Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?


    **** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    Brian H¹©, Aug 9, 2003
    #3
  4. Paul Eden

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    <QM6Za.8100$>
    Brian H¹© scrawled:

    >X-No-Archive: Yes
    > °Mike° said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>
    >>> X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>> Paul Eden said:
    >>>
    >>>> Hi all
    >>>>
    >>>> Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>
    >>>> I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>> install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>> nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>> memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>
    >>>> Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>> that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>
    >>>> Cheers
    >>>
    >>> Have you turned off your anti-virus?

    >>
    >> Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?

    >
    >**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.


    No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.

    Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?

    --
    "I doubt it."
    °Mike°, Aug 9, 2003
    #4
  5. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    and I'm looking for answers not grief...

    °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    > <QM6Za.8100$>
    > Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >
    >
    >
    >>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>°Mike° said:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >
    >Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #5
  6. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    and I'm looking for answers not grief...


    °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    > <QM6Za.8100$>
    > Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >
    >
    >
    >>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>°Mike° said:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >
    >Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #6
  7. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Mike

    Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    and I'm looking for answers not grief...


    °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    > <QM6Za.8100$>
    > Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >
    >
    >
    >>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>°Mike° said:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >
    >Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #7
  8. Paul Eden

    °Mike° Guest

    Since when did you become group moderator?


    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:55:14 +0100, in
    <F27Za.8563$>
    Paul Eden scrawled:

    >Mike
    >
    >Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    >and I'm looking for answers not grief...
    >
    >
    >°Mike° wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    >> <QM6Za.8100$>
    >> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>°Mike° said:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>>> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >>>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>
    >>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >>
    >>
    >>


    --
    Basic computer maintenance
    http://uk.geocities.com/personel44/maintenance.html
    °Mike°, Aug 9, 2003
    #8
  9. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Since I started this thread

    °Mike° wrote:

    >Since when did you become group moderator?
    >
    >
    >On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:55:14 +0100, in
    > <F27Za.8563$>
    > Paul Eden scrawled:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Mike
    >>
    >>Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    >>and I'm looking for answers not grief...
    >>
    >>
    >>°Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    >>> <QM6Za.8100$>
    >>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>°Mike° said:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>>>> <nx6Za.8092$>
    >>>>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>>
    >>>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #9
  10. Paul Eden

    Mara Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:53:56 +0100, Paul Eden wrote:

    >Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    >and I'm looking for answers not grief...


    What you are looking for matters not at all. This is a usenet newsgroup, not
    your personal mailing list.

    http://www.duke.edu/eng169s2/group4/alok/English/map.htm

    "Evangelism:

    Everyone is tempted from time to time to evangelize, to stride boldly into the
    enemy's camp and throw down the gauntlet. We will never see the end of people
    who pop up on comp.sys.intel praising Macs and Amigas; who send mail to the
    SKEPTIC list that flying saucers really, truly do exist; who enlighten the
    Buddhist newsgroups that they're all bound for hell, and on and on.

    In the entire history of the net, no one has managed to do this without looking
    like a complete idiot."

    That would be you, in this case.

    "I'd cut my losses, if I were you, and apologise. Trying to play Newsgroup
    Savior will only get you killfiled, not answers."

    --
    There is no order to the universe, and no reason, and no cause.
    We are alone and outnumbered, and the universe is a far more
    dangerous place than anyone has ever told you.
    --Camber Tremodian
    Mara, Aug 9, 2003
    #10
  11. Paul Eden

    Mara Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:03:39 +0100, Paul Eden wrote:

    >Since I started this thread


    Whoopee. Anyone can start a thread about anything at all, and anyone can post
    anything they want wherever they want. This group has no charter, and no
    moderator.

    This post makes you look even more foolish than the last one. Are you shooting
    for a new 24HSHD record?

    "Jesus H. Christ."

    >
    >°Mike° wrote:
    >
    >>Since when did you become group moderator?


    <snip>

    --
    There is no order to the universe, and no reason, and no cause.
    We are alone and outnumbered, and the universe is a far more
    dangerous place than anyone has ever told you.
    --Camber Tremodian
    Mara, Aug 9, 2003
    #11
  12. Paul Eden

    Mara Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:46:33 +0100, °Mike° wrote:

    <snip>
    >No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >
    >Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?


    Why bother, °Mike°? He doesn't appear to care _how_ stupid he looks to the rest
    of the world, and nothing you say is going to make him smart enough to grasp the
    fact that he should.

    "You know what will happen. The same thing that always does."

    --
    There is no order to the universe, and no reason, and no cause.
    We are alone and outnumbered, and the universe is a far more
    dangerous place than anyone has ever told you.
    --Camber Tremodian
    Mara, Aug 9, 2003
    #12
  13. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Um... no dream.. if you look back 8 posts, it's my name up there...

    To bad people find it more important to maintain some kind of 'face'
    and perpetuating pointless arguments in wholy the wrong groups, rather
    than putting the efforts into assisting others. If your grudge with
    this bloke is legitimate, you would take it elsewhere and keep it
    private rather than publicly stating his wrong-doings (he who shouts
    loudest and longest ~must~ be right... yes?) , which doesn't really do
    anything apart from disrupt others.

    Rant over and finished. Back to information hunting.

    Gone.

    °Mike° barfed:

    >Dream on.
    >
    >On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:03:39 +0100, in
    > <ya7Za.8572$>
    > Paul Eden scrawled:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Since I started this thread
    >>
    >>°Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Since when did you become group moderator?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:55:14 +0100, in
    >>> <F27Za.8563$>
    >>> Paul Eden scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Mike
    >>>>
    >>>>Take your personal rant else where - it's too darn hot to chuff about
    >>>>and I'm looking for answers not grief...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>°Mike° wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:35:45 +0100, in
    >>>>><QM6Za.8100$>
    >>>>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>>>°Mike° said:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:19:16 +0100, in
    >>>>>>><nx6Za.8092$>
    >>>>>>> Brian H¹© scrawled:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>>>>>>>Paul Eden said:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Hi all
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    >>>>>>>>>install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    >>>>>>>>>nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    >>>>>>>>>memory, but no processor time.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    >>>>>>>>>that my 'temp' directories are empty
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Cheers
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Have you turned off your anti-virus?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Are you going to answer my response to your accusation?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>**** off Mike, all you are doing is proving that *you* can't drop something.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>>>>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>>>>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #13
  14. Paul Eden

    Paul Eden Guest

    Um... pot calling kettle black?

    Mara wrote:

    >On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:46:33 +0100, °Mike° wrote:
    >
    ><snip>
    >
    >
    >>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>
    >>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Why bother, °Mike°? He doesn't appear to care _how_ stupid he looks to the rest
    >of the world, and nothing you say is going to make him smart enough to grasp the
    >fact that he should.
    >
    >"You know what will happen. The same thing that always does."
    >
    >
    >
    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003
    #14
  15. Paul Eden

    Mara Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:31:46 +0100, Paul Eden wrote:

    >Um... pot calling kettle black?


    Keep digging, Paul. Maybe if you dig clear through to Pluto, you might find a
    clue somewhere along the way. But considering your previous posts along with
    this one, I'd say the chances are pretty slim indeed.

    "You're so clueless, you're funny. Buh-bye now; what I told you is indeed true.
    :)"

    >
    >Mara wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:46:33 +0100, °Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >><snip>
    >>
    >>
    >>>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>>
    >>>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>Why bother, °Mike°? He doesn't appear to care _how_ stupid he looks to the rest
    >>of the world, and nothing you say is going to make him smart enough to grasp the
    >>fact that he should.
    >>
    >>"You know what will happen. The same thing that always does."
    >>
    >>
    >>


    --
    There is no order to the universe, and no reason, and no cause.
    We are alone and outnumbered, and the universe is a far more
    dangerous place than anyone has ever told you.
    --Camber Tremodian
    Mara, Aug 9, 2003
    #15
  16. Paul Eden

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 09:25:41 -0500, in
    <>
    Mara scrawled:

    >On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:46:33 +0100, °Mike° wrote:
    >
    ><snip>
    >>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>
    >>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?

    >
    >Why bother, °Mike°? He doesn't appear to care _how_ stupid he looks
    >to the rest of the world,


    That's patently obvious, but when somebody accuses me of
    something, I have a right to ask that they explain their accusations.

    >and nothing you say is going to make him smart enough to grasp the
    >fact that he should.


    I know that, but if he wants to throw slurs, insults, accusations,
    or whatever, he has to be aware that there are people who will
    retaliate.

    >"You know what will happen. The same thing that always does."


    --
    Basic computer maintenance
    http://uk.geocities.com/personel44/maintenance.html
    °Mike°, Aug 9, 2003
    #16
  17. Paul Eden

    Brian H¹© Guest

    X-No-Archive: Yes
    °Mike° said:

    > On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:30:27 +0100, in
    > <Gz7Za.8586$>
    > Paul Eden scrawled:
    >
    >> Um... no dream.. if you look back 8 posts, it's my name up there...

    >
    > I don't give a **** if it's George W Bush's name up there.
    > This is usenet; this is not *your* thread; live with it.
    >
    >> To bad people find it more important to maintain some kind
    >> of 'face' and perpetuating pointless arguments in wholy the
    >> wrong groups,

    >
    > This is the group Brian the St00pid made an accusation against


    You immature fuckwit.
    Should I start refering to you as MtF from now on?

    > me, and this is the group that I am asking him why he made
    > that accusation - he, of course is running away, as usual.
    >
    >> rather than putting the efforts into assisting others.

    >
    > Check my posting history, buddy!
    >
    >> If your grudge with this bloke is legitimate, you would take it
    >> elsewhere and keep it private rather than publicly stating his
    >> wrong-doings

    >
    > Why would I do that, when his accusation was made publicly,
    > in *this* group?
    >
    >> (he who shouts loudest and longest ~must~ be right... yes?) ,

    >
    > Careful, you're beginning to sound like BtS.
    >
    >> which doesn't really do anything apart from disrupt others.

    >
    > Oh, dear, has *your* nice warm, comfy little corner of usenet been
    > invaded by nasty, nasty trouble makers? Awww! Shame!
    >
    >> Rant over and finished. Back to information hunting.
    >>
    >> Gone.


    (snip)
    Brian H¹©, Aug 9, 2003
    #17
  18. Paul Eden

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 15:50:00 +0100, in
    <qS7Za.8137$>
    Brian H¹© scrawled:

    >X-No-Archive: Yes
    > °Mike° said:
    >
    >> On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:30:27 +0100, in
    >> <Gz7Za.8586$>
    >> Paul Eden scrawled:
    >>
    >>> Um... no dream.. if you look back 8 posts, it's my name up there...

    >>
    >> I don't give a **** if it's George W Bush's name up there.
    >> This is usenet; this is not *your* thread; live with it.
    >>
    >>> To bad people find it more important to maintain some kind
    >>> of 'face' and perpetuating pointless arguments in wholy the
    >>> wrong groups,

    >>
    >> This is the group Brian the St00pid made an accusation against

    >
    >You immature fuckwit.
    >Should I start refering to you as MtF from now on?


    Refer to me as you wish - from behind your ignorance and st00pidity.


    >> me, and this is the group that I am asking him why he made
    >> that accusation - he, of course is running away, as usual.
    >>
    >>> rather than putting the efforts into assisting others.

    >>
    >> Check my posting history, buddy!
    >>
    >>> If your grudge with this bloke is legitimate, you would take it
    >>> elsewhere and keep it private rather than publicly stating his
    >>> wrong-doings

    >>
    >> Why would I do that, when his accusation was made publicly,
    >> in *this* group?
    >>
    >>> (he who shouts loudest and longest ~must~ be right... yes?) ,

    >>
    >> Careful, you're beginning to sound like BtS.
    >>
    >>> which doesn't really do anything apart from disrupt others.

    >>
    >> Oh, dear, has *your* nice warm, comfy little corner of usenet been
    >> invaded by nasty, nasty trouble makers? Awww! Shame!
    >>
    >>> Rant over and finished. Back to information hunting.
    >>>
    >>> Gone.

    >
    >(snip)
    >


    --
    Basic computer maintenance
    http://uk.geocities.com/personel44/maintenance.html
    °Mike°, Aug 9, 2003
    #18
  19. Paul Eden

    Mara Guest

    On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:48:40 +0100, °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 09:25:41 -0500, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >>On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 14:46:33 +0100, °Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >><snip>
    >>>No, Brian. *YOU* accused me, and when I challenged you, you're
    >>>not man enough to answer that challenge. You just run away.
    >>>
    >>>Why should I drop an accusation against me? There, that's another
    >>>question for you. Are you man enough to answer both?

    >>
    >>Why bother, °Mike°? He doesn't appear to care _how_ stupid he looks
    >>to the rest of the world,

    >
    >That's patently obvious, but when somebody accuses me of
    >something, I have a right to ask that they explain their accusations.


    True enough. You're a better man than I am then, because I more or less gave up
    on it long ago; some posters will say what they want to say without bothering to
    discover whether it's true or not, and that's something I can't do anything
    about; and in the end, the ones who matter know better anyway - and usually say
    so. :)

    >
    >>and nothing you say is going to make him smart enough to grasp the
    >>fact that he should.

    >
    >I know that, but if he wants to throw slurs, insults, accusations,
    >or whatever, he has to be aware that there are people who will
    >retaliate.


    He appears to be too narcissistic to be able to care about that. That's the main
    reason why he doesn't get out of my killfile. I wish I could be proven wrong on
    that, but all indications up to the present time say otherwise.

    "They kind of scream it, actually."

    >
    >>"You know what will happen. The same thing that always does."


    --
    There is no order to the universe, and no reason, and no cause.
    We are alone and outnumbered, and the universe is a far more
    dangerous place than anyone has ever told you.
    --Camber Tremodian
    Mara, Aug 9, 2003
    #19
  20. Howdy!

    "Paul Eden" <> wrote in message
    news:As6Za.8538$...
    > Hi all
    >
    > Have a problem and was wondering if anyone can enlighten me.
    >
    > I am running W2K server SP2. When double clicking the 'setup.exe' to
    > install applications, all I get is an hour glass (briefly) and then
    > nothing, but 'setup.exe' remains in the process list consuming 1MB of
    > memory, but no processor time.


    I'd do an image backup, then install SP4. There's a LOT of fixes in
    SP3 and SP4.

    >
    > Anyone have experience of this / know how to fix it? I have ensured
    > that my 'temp' directories are empty


    Not offhand, but a service pack upgrade is still a good
    recommendation.

    RwP
    Ralph Wade Phillips, Aug 9, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?=

    W2K Prof. to W2K Prof. File & Printer Sharing Not Working

    =?Utf-8?B?Qm9i?=, Dec 12, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    2,264
    Malke
    Dec 17, 2004
  2. Paul Eden

    [Fwd: Application installs fail in W2K]

    Paul Eden, Aug 9, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    387
    Paul Eden
    Aug 9, 2003
  3. Mike
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    560
  4. Gerard
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    994
    Gerard
    Jan 2, 2005
  5. tony sayer

    16?, bit application fail to work ?..

    tony sayer, Apr 24, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    386
    Brian L Johnson
    Apr 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page