Re: w2k updates failed
From: DL (dl_at_spoofmail.co)
Date: 07/19/04
- Next message: Alan Illeman: "Re: W2K Pro SP4 Update Successful => LOST NIC Connectivity !!!!!"
- Previous message: DL: "Re: I can't windows 2000 to update to xp"
- In reply to: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Next in thread: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Reply: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:31:25 +0100
If you did a fresh install the sys will run faster anyway, no matter which
file sys you use.
The access difference between the two is in reality for benchmark purposes
only, and has no real practical relevance, unless you have some v.specific
requirements
"Alan Illeman" <illemann@surfbest.net> wrote in message
news:10ffmju9sp9m0f3@news.supernews.com...
>
> "David" <dm451@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:i47ff012sc5retuud4f27i7scoh88bkv2k@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:11:38 -0700, "ines" <transoft@magnet.ch> wrote:
> >
> > >i`m trying to do the w2kupdates. start the windows update
> > >topic, the computer is conneting with the ms-server and
> > >shows 0%, then 33%, 66% and the result of ounded important
> > >updates and service packs is 25. two of theses must be
> > >installed separatly. i mark them delete and start the
> > >download of the 23 other files. on the first try, after a
> > >few minute the download stops, after cancelling this
> > >download a new try - nothing ist going on.
> > >whats probably the problem?
> >
> >
> > Here's the rules I follow, and all my updates have always been good.
> >
> > 1) Log on as the Administrator.
> >
> > 2) Take the updates *in the order* they are listed by the Windows
> > Update service site, if you don't think you need an update (like maybe
> > you use another browser so why take an IE update).
> >
> > Take the update, anyway, unless it's NOT for software that came with
> > your version of Windows.
> >
> > 3) Even if it says you don't need to restart your computer after lots
> > of the updates, that's not the best road to follow.
> >
> > After even 2 or 3 minor updates, which say you do NOT need to re-start
> > your computer, quit, and re-start your computer, anyway.
> >
> > Windows has a limited amount of changes that can be made to it without
> > a re-start, according to MS. Don't tempt fate, here.
> >
> > What I recommend is just follow the above. I have w2k with all
> > updates, and have never had a problem with updates, since I started
> > following this advice.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Dave
>
> I think you have been very lucky or have a very good firewall. To install
> software, the Admin account is necessary but you shouldn't be online
> at the same time!
>
> Start=>Help=>Security=>Security OverView=>Related Topics=>
> Protecting against viruses and trojan horses=>Related Topics=>
> Why you should not run your computer as an administrator.
>
> Personally, I have a very robust firewall (Win2k Pro + sp4(CD))
> and have no 'updates' at all. A week ago I did a fresh install
> and chose not to install the NTFS file system i.e. no security,
> just to check how vulnerable I would be and am happy to
> report that all is well - and the PC runs a lot faster!
>
>
- Next message: Alan Illeman: "Re: W2K Pro SP4 Update Successful => LOST NIC Connectivity !!!!!"
- Previous message: DL: "Re: I can't windows 2000 to update to xp"
- In reply to: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Next in thread: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Reply: Alan Illeman: "Re: w2k updates failed"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|