Completely stuck with new Shuttle computer...

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by SR, Nov 2, 2003.

  1. SR

    SR Guest

    Got a new computer... and nothing works as desired!:)
    Well, it's a "Shuttle clone" BIOSTAR iDEQ 200P. It contains an AMD Athlon 64
    3200+ and a 160 GB UltraATA 100 hard drive.
    The Bios shows 160 GB, but Windows XP sees and formats only 130 GB. Only one
    partitions since there was no choice.
    I selected NTFS format...
    Windows installed OK.
    Somebody told me to reinstall again, since Windows might now offer the
    creation of partitions. I did that and got the following message soon after:

    C:\Partition 1 [NTFS] 131062 MB
    Unpartitioned Space 8 MB

    Then I wanted delete the entire Windows program and start again.
    It says "To delete the selected partition, press D."
    I got a message that mentioned that I couldn't delete since there were some
    system files... whatever.
    Then I remembered that disks in NTFS format cannot be deleted like FAT 16 or
    32 format (read it somewhere).

    Now saying it in other words: I am stuck!

    How do I go from here?
    I have Windows XP Pro loaded and could proceed installing software on the
    existing 130GB.
    Which Windows compatible software is downloadable (commercial or free) that
    can erase the NTFS format to start from scratch; I have a USB memory stick?
    Or what do I need to do to get the remaining 30 GB recognized? I also have a
    180 GB hard drive which I'd like to add as a slave? Same problem as with the
    160 GB model.

    Have you got any magic up your sleeve on how to proceed?



    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    SR, Nov 2, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. SR

    Mara Guest

    On 2 Nov 2003 06:20:10 GMT, SR wrote:

    >Got a new computer... and nothing works as desired!:)
    >Well, it's a "Shuttle clone" BIOSTAR iDEQ 200P. It contains an AMD Athlon 64
    >3200+ and a 160 GB UltraATA 100 hard drive.
    >The Bios shows 160 GB, but Windows XP sees and formats only 130 GB. Only one
    >partitions since there was no choice.
    >I selected NTFS format...
    >Windows installed OK.
    >Somebody told me to reinstall again, since Windows might now offer the
    >creation of partitions. I did that and got the following message soon after:
    >
    >C:\Partition 1 [NTFS] 131062 MB
    > Unpartitioned Space 8 MB
    >
    >Then I wanted delete the entire Windows program and start again.
    >It says "To delete the selected partition, press D."
    >I got a message that mentioned that I couldn't delete since there were some
    >system files... whatever.
    >Then I remembered that disks in NTFS format cannot be deleted like FAT 16 or
    >32 format (read it somewhere).
    >
    >Now saying it in other words: I am stuck!


    Deleting NTFS partitions:

    http://www.kamworld.net/chris/tech/winnt/DeleteNTFS.html

    >
    >How do I go from here?
    >I have Windows XP Pro loaded and could proceed installing software on the
    >existing 130GB.
    >Which Windows compatible software is downloadable (commercial or free) that
    >can erase the NTFS format to start from scratch; I have a USB memory stick?
    >Or what do I need to do to get the remaining 30 GB recognized? I also have a
    >180 GB hard drive which I'd like to add as a slave? Same problem as with the
    >160 GB model.
    >
    >Have you got any magic up your sleeve on how to proceed?


    Biostar support is here:

    http://biostar-usa.com/techmain.asp

    --
    Stupidity, when maintained long enough, _is_ a form of malice.
    -- Richard's corollary to Hanlon's Razor
     
    Mara, Nov 2, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. SR

    SR Guest

    > Biostar support is here:
    >
    > http://biostar-usa.com/techmain.asp
    >


    Thanks for this one...

    BUT NOT FOR THIS ONE!!!

    > http://www.kamworld.net/chris/tech/winnt/DeleteNTFS.html
    >
    >

    ***************************************
    CHARACTERISTICS
    If this trojan is run, it will overwrite the first physical sector
    (i.e. the Master Boot Record) on the first and second hard drives on the
    machine. This will destroy the partition tables and make the hard drives
    inaccessible.
    ***************************************

    My anti-virus software reports the above... It not only deletes NTFS
    files but renders your machine and HD unusable.




    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    SR, Nov 2, 2003
    #3
  4. SR

    slumpy Guest

    "So, Mr Slumpy you *really* are the perpetual comedian, aren't you ?" I
    threw back my head and roared with laughter as SR continued:

    > Got a new computer... and nothing works as desired!:)


    Sounds like you should stop blundering around and get someone who knows
    to sort it.
    --
    slumpy
    no more
    no less
    just slumpy
     
    slumpy, Nov 2, 2003
    #4
  5. SR

    Mara Guest

    On 2 Nov 2003 07:20:50 GMT, SR wrote:

    >> Biostar support is here:
    >>
    >> http://biostar-usa.com/techmain.asp
    >>

    >
    >Thanks for this one...
    >
    >BUT NOT FOR THIS ONE!!!
    >
    >> http://www.kamworld.net/chris/tech/winnt/DeleteNTFS.html
    >>
    >>

    >***************************************
    > CHARACTERISTICS
    > If this trojan is run, it will overwrite the first physical sector
    >(i.e. the Master Boot Record) on the first and second hard drives on the
    >machine. This will destroy the partition tables and make the hard drives
    >inaccessible.
    > ***************************************
    >
    > My anti-virus software reports the above... It not only deletes NTFS
    >files but renders your machine and HD unusable.


    I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that it was considered malware, and for that I
    apologise. My bad. :(

    It renders the hdd unusable _because_ the partitions are gone. And if the
    partitions are gone, the hard drive, and thus the system, is unusable, until
    it's repartitioned and reformatted. Did I misread your post, or did you intend
    to delete the NTFS partitions?

    In order to delete NTFS partitions you will have to delete the old MBR anyway -
    that's also what I have to do when uninstalling Linux and reformatting the hdd
    to FAT32, because I used Grub.

    OTOH, you might find something here that will help, if you just want to try to
    recover them:

    http://www.partition-recovery.com/partition.htm

    --
    I always try to go the extra mile at work, but my boss always
    finds me and brings me back.
     
    Mara, Nov 2, 2003
    #5
  6. It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 08:51:35 -0600, just as I was halfway through a
    large jam doughnut, that Mara wrote:

    > On 2 Nov 2003 07:20:50 GMT, SR wrote:
    >
    >>> Biostar support is here:
    >>>
    >>> http://biostar-usa.com/techmain.asp
    >>>

    >>
    >>Thanks for this one...
    >>
    >>BUT NOT FOR THIS ONE!!!
    >>
    >>> http://www.kamworld.net/chris/tech/winnt/DeleteNTFS.html
    >>>
    >>>

    >>***************************************
    >> CHARACTERISTICS
    >> If this trojan is run, it will overwrite the first physical sector
    >>(i.e. the Master Boot Record) on the first and second hard drives on the
    >>machine. This will destroy the partition tables and make the hard drives
    >>inaccessible.
    >> ***************************************
    >>
    >> My anti-virus software reports the above... It not only deletes NTFS
    >>files but renders your machine and HD unusable.

    >
    > I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that it was considered malware, and for that I
    > apologise. My bad. :(


    It's NOT malware. It was originally part of a M$ Resource Kit in
    the old NT 3.1 CD. It can be a very useful file when you need it. :)
    It's probably detected that way, because of the changes it makes
    and that actually, it is a very useful tool.

    The official Microsoft KB article for the problem, & a link to
    download the NT Resource Kit containing delpart (though it's over
    4 MB though for the whole package!! ) is here:
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q103049

    > It renders the hdd unusable _because_ the partitions are gone. And if the
    > partitions are gone, the hard drive, and thus the system, is unusable, until
    > it's repartitioned and reformatted. Did I misread your post, or did you intend
    > to delete the NTFS partitions?
    >
    > In order to delete NTFS partitions you will have to delete the old MBR anyway -
    > that's also what I have to do when uninstalling Linux and reformatting the hdd
    > to FAT32, because I used Grub.
    >
    > OTOH, you might find something here that will help, if you just want to try to
    > recover them:
    >
    > http://www.partition-recovery.com/partition.htm
     
    William Poaster, Nov 2, 2003
    #6
  7. SR

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 15:24:12 +0000, William Poaster wrote:

    >It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 08:51:35 -0600, just as I was halfway through a
    >large jam doughnut, that Mara wrote:


    <snip>
    >> I'm sorry - I wasn't aware that it was considered malware, and for that I
    >> apologise. My bad. :(

    >
    >It's NOT malware. It was originally part of a M$ Resource Kit in
    >the old NT 3.1 CD. It can be a very useful file when you need it. :)
    >It's probably detected that way, because of the changes it makes
    >and that actually, it is a very useful tool.


    That makes sense. I'm not sure why I remembered Delpart - it's been so long
    since I've messed with 3.1 or 3.11 that I can't even remember how to install
    programs in it. LOL

    I mainly just run FAT32, even with 2k, for ease of use. So, I've used Fdisk for
    that. The Reiserfs partitions threw me for a loop the first time I tried to
    uninstall SuSE - then I felt kind of stupid when I found out that all you had to
    do was use SuSE itself to delete the partitions. But that's what happens when
    you're a Linux newbie, I guess. <g>

    "Hopefully, that won't last very long, once 9 is installed."


    >The official Microsoft KB article for the problem, & a link to
    >download the NT Resource Kit containing delpart (though it's over
    >4 MB though for the whole package!! ) is here:
    >http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q103049


    Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff come down the
    pipe since that was published, and there have been so many changes to computer
    hardware and software that's it's almost mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff.
    ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of course - I don't think he ever forgets anything.
    <g>)

    "Though once in awhile, remembering the old crap comes in handy."

    --
    I always try to go the extra mile at work, but my boss always
    finds me and brings me back.
     
    Mara, Nov 2, 2003
    #7
  8. SR

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    <>
    Mara scrawled:


    <snip>

    >Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff come down the
    >pipe since that was published, and there have been so many changes to computer
    >hardware and software that's it's almost mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff.
    >('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of course - I don't think he ever forgets anything.
    ><g>)


    Forgets what? :)

    --
    "Am I dreaming?"
     
    °Mike°, Nov 2, 2003
    #8
  9. It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 15:57:32 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:

    > On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >>Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff come down the
    >>pipe since that was published, and there have been so many changes to computer
    >>hardware and software that's it's almost mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff.
    >>('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of course - I don't think he ever forgets anything.
    >><g>)

    >
    > Forgets what? :)


    Um...I dunno, I've forgotten.. <g>
     
    William Poaster, Nov 2, 2003
    #9
  10. SR

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 15:57:32 +0000, °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >
    ><snip>
    >
    >>Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff come down the
    >>pipe since that was published, and there have been so many changes to computer
    >>hardware and software that's it's almost mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff.
    >>('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of course - I don't think he ever forgets anything.
    >><g>)

    >
    >Forgets what? :)


    Huh?! ;)

    >
    >--
    >"Am I dreaming?"


    "Who am I? Where am I? What day is this, and why am I in this handbasket? ;)"

    --
    I always try to go the extra mile at work, but my boss always
    finds me and brings me back.
     
    Mara, Nov 2, 2003
    #10
  11. SR

    Harrison Guest

    Installing SP1 for XP will correct the 130 GB problem.

    On 2 Nov 2003 06:20:10 GMT, "SR" <-net.ne.jp> wrote:

    >Got a new computer... and nothing works as desired!:)
    >Well, it's a "Shuttle clone" BIOSTAR iDEQ 200P. It contains an AMD Athlon 64
    >3200+ and a 160 GB UltraATA 100 hard drive.
    >The Bios shows 160 GB, but Windows XP sees and formats only 130 GB. Only one
    >partitions since there was no choice.
    >I selected NTFS format...
    >Windows installed OK.
    >Somebody told me to reinstall again, since Windows might now offer the
    >creation of partitions. I did that and got the following message soon after:
    >
    >C:\Partition 1 [NTFS] 131062 MB
    > Unpartitioned Space 8 MB
    >
    >Then I wanted delete the entire Windows program and start again.
    >It says "To delete the selected partition, press D."
    >I got a message that mentioned that I couldn't delete since there were some
    >system files... whatever.
    >Then I remembered that disks in NTFS format cannot be deleted like FAT 16 or
    >32 format (read it somewhere).
    >
    >Now saying it in other words: I am stuck!
    >
    >How do I go from here?
    >I have Windows XP Pro loaded and could proceed installing software on the
    >existing 130GB.
    >Which Windows compatible software is downloadable (commercial or free) that
    >can erase the NTFS format to start from scratch; I have a USB memory stick?
    >Or what do I need to do to get the remaining 30 GB recognized? I also have a
    >180 GB hard drive which I'd like to add as a slave? Same problem as with the
    >160 GB model.
    >
    >Have you got any magic up your sleeve on how to proceed?
    >
    >
    >
    >_______________________________________________________________________________
    >Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    > <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    >
     
    Harrison, Nov 2, 2003
    #11
  12. SR

    trout Guest

    °Mike° wrote:

    > On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)

    >
    > Forgets what? :)


    Forgets to put pants on.
    --
    "Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"
     
    trout, Nov 2, 2003
    #12
  13. SR

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:

    >°Mike° wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >> <>
    >> Mara scrawled:
    >>
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)

    >>
    >> Forgets what? :)

    >
    > Forgets to put pants on.
    >--
    >"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"


    I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is mandatory (except
    on your head, of course.)

    --
    "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
     
    Mara, Nov 2, 2003
    #13
  14. SR

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, in
    <bo40b3$16kng8$-berlin.de>
    trout scrawled:

    >°Mike° wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >> <>
    >> Mara scrawled:
    >>
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)

    >>
    >> Forgets what? :)

    >
    > Forgets to put pants on.
    >--
    >"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"


    I've never heard it described like that before.

    --
    "Oh, 'weekend'! I thought you said something else..."
     
    °Mike°, Nov 2, 2003
    #14
  15. SR

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:08:45 -0600, in
    <>
    Mara scrawled:

    >On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:
    >
    >>°Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>> <>
    >>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> <snip>
    >>>
    >>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>
    >>> Forgets what? :)

    >>
    >> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>--
    >>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"

    >
    >I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is
    >mandatory (except on your head, of course.)


    I thought that was underpants?

    --
    "You mean I've been nekid all this time for nowt!?"
     
    °Mike°, Nov 2, 2003
    #15
  16. It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:29:56 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:

    > On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:08:45 -0600, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >>On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:
    >>
    >>>°Mike° wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>>> <>
    >>>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> <snip>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>>
    >>>> Forgets what? :)
    >>>
    >>> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>>--
    >>>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"

    >>
    >>I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is
    >>mandatory (except on your head, of course.)

    >
    > I thought that was underpants?


    Yes, with the obligatory pencil in each nostril?
     
    William Poaster, Nov 2, 2003
    #16
  17. It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:29:50 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:

    > On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, in
    > <bo40b3$16kng8$-berlin.de>
    > trout scrawled:
    >
    >>°Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>> <>
    >>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> <snip>
    >>>
    >>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>
    >>> Forgets what? :)

    >>
    >> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>--
    >>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"

    >
    > I've never heard it described like that before.


    "Let it all hang out!"
     
    William Poaster, Nov 2, 2003
    #17
  18. SR

    °Mike° Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:49:23 +0000, in
    <>
    William Poaster scrawled:

    >It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:29:56 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    >large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:08:45 -0600, in
    >> <>
    >> Mara scrawled:
    >>
    >>>On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>°Mike° wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>>>> <>
    >>>>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> <snip>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Forgets what? :)
    >>>>
    >>>> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>>>--
    >>>>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"
    >>>
    >>>I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is
    >>>mandatory (except on your head, of course.)

    >>
    >> I thought that was underpants?

    >
    >Yes, with the obligatory pencil in each nostril?


    What if you don't have nostrils?

    --
    "I'll ask if I can have them fitted, the next time I'm in the shop."
     
    °Mike°, Nov 3, 2003
    #18
  19. SR

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:29:56 +0000, °Mike° wrote:

    >On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:08:45 -0600, in
    > <>
    > Mara scrawled:
    >
    >>On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:
    >>
    >>>°Mike° wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>>> <>
    >>>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> <snip>
    >>>>
    >>>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>>
    >>>> Forgets what? :)
    >>>
    >>> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>>--
    >>>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"

    >>
    >>I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is
    >>mandatory (except on your head, of course.)

    >
    >I thought that was underpants?


    You mean to tell me that all this time that you've had your underpants on your
    head you've been wearing regular pants anyway?!?

    "Another dream, crushed to dust."

    ;)

    >--
    >"You mean I've been nekid all this time for nowt!?"


    There is never a good reason _not_ to be nekid. Unless it's too cold. Or
    snowing. Or your Aunt is coming for a visit. Or your Mum's having her bridge
    club meet at your house. Or....

    "Ok, ya got me. Maybe there _is_ a reason not to be nekid. I'm not going for it,
    though."

    --
    "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
     
    Mara, Nov 3, 2003
    #19
  20. It was on Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:01:13 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:

    > On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:49:23 +0000, in
    > <>
    > William Poaster scrawled:
    >
    >>It was on Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:29:56 +0000, just as I was halfway through a
    >>large jam doughnut, that °Mike° wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:08:45 -0600, in
    >>> <>
    >>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>
    >>>>On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 14:26:38 -0800, trout wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>°Mike° wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:41:47 -0600, in
    >>>>>> <>
    >>>>>> Mara scrawled:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> <snip>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Thanks. :) I *knew* it was legit, but there's been so much stuff
    >>>>>>> come down the pipe since that was published, and there have been so
    >>>>>>> many changes to computer hardware and software that's it's almost
    >>>>>>> mandatory to forget the obsolete stuff. ('Cept in °Mike°'s case, of
    >>>>>>> course - I don't think he ever forgets anything. <g>)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Forgets what? :)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Forgets to put pants on.
    >>>>>--
    >>>>>"Or is that a casual, 'weekend' look?"
    >>>>
    >>>>I might remind you that this _is_ 24HSHD. The lack of pants is
    >>>>mandatory (except on your head, of course.)
    >>>
    >>> I thought that was underpants?

    >>
    >>Yes, with the obligatory pencil in each nostril?

    >
    > What if you don't have nostrils?


    Use your ears?
     
    William Poaster, Nov 3, 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. Michael

    To Shuttle or not to Shuttle.

    Michael, Apr 26, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    782
    Fuzzy Logic
    Apr 27, 2004
  2. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    776
  3. =?Utf-8?B?YXBwcmVudGljZSBpZGlvdA==?=

    Shuttle startup button quasi-useless with new monitor

    =?Utf-8?B?YXBwcmVudGljZSBpZGlvdA==?=, Jul 15, 2007, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    465
    Tony Sperling
    Jul 15, 2007
  4. News Reader
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    4,491
    Bob Moore
    Apr 19, 2008
  5. cjd
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    816
Loading...

Share This Page