Exact match. Not showing close matches.
'[OT] Changing PC operating systems'
John Pearson wrote:
> I want to change my Windows 95 operating system to a newer Win 95
> version. The newer version will not let me install over the older
> version. How should I do this.
Ha! Ha! Caught you! You are trying to install an "OEM" version which
is supposed to be put ONLY on a new machine!
You have to make a special version of the batch files on the install
floppy. You may also need to remove much of your old Windows system.
It's a complex process. You are better off buying a new drive,
installing the OEM version on it, re-installing your apps and
transferring over your working data. This also handles the matter of
formatting the drive into FAT32 which is highly desirable.
Lots o' Luck!
At 16:55 04/16/99 -0500, Paul wrote:
>I would have liked to E-mail John directly, but nowhere in my E-mail did it
>say what johns address was.
>How can i find it? I'm using Win98 Outlook Express. If i click on "reply to
>author" or "Reply to all" i still get the
>List address? I'm sure i don't have an option clicked, but i feel retarded
>today. Any help is appreciated.
no need to feel retarded... :) usually, the original poster's address does
not come up, in neither option, =unless= he configured his "reply-to:" header.
the only way to get the original poster's address in the case where he
didn't configure the "reply-to:" header is to get a view of the message
with all the included internet header, and use the information in the
"from:" header (which is the original sender's email). i guess the only way
to get this info in outlook express is to right-click on the subject line
(or alt-enter, with the focus on the line) in the window with the message
subjects, and select the "details" tab in the upcoming dialog, where you
can see the main header entries, among which the "from:" header is. (i
could tell you how you can do it easier in eudora light, which is also free. :)
the reason behind this is that the "reply-to:" header is supposed to be
from the same person as the "from:" header, indicating that he wants
answers to go to that address. if it is not configured by the original
sender, the piclist's list server fills it in with the piclist address, and
that's why you don't get the information from the "from:" header: your
email program assumes (basically correctly) that the person from the
"from:" header wants to be replied to by the address in the "reply-to:"
header. this is one reason =for= configuring your "reply-to:" header in
your email program: to make it easier for others to reply to you personally.
Boy, am I glad I use, and can manage, Netscape for mail!
> this is one reason =for= configuring your "reply-to:" header in
> your email program: to make it easier for others to reply to you
So mine is always "reply-to:" me eh? If you hit "Reply to sender", it
goes to just me, if you hit "Reply to all", it goes to PICLIST too?
I think I am getting it figured...
*Your* "reply-to:" is the list, BTW.
|At 17:48 04/17/99 +1000, Paul B. Webster VK2BZC wrote:
>> this is one reason =for= configuring your "reply-to:" header in
>> your email program: to make it easier for others to reply to you
> So mine is always "reply-to:" me eh? If you hit "Reply to sender", it
>goes to just me, if you hit "Reply to all", it goes to PICLIST too?
yes, correct. that's why you might have gotten (and might still get) some
of my replies twice: privately and through the list, because i always use
"reply to all" (because of the citation header eudora inserts; with "reply
to sender" it would only say "at ... you wrote:", which is not very useful
on a list with more than two members :) when i reply to the list, and in
your case i have to delete your private address from the address field
(which i forget every now and then).
> *Your* "reply-to:" is the list, BTW.
hm, that's strange, it should be "home.com", that's how it's set. it lists
seems to be that my ISP's mail server is messing with the headers, and
since the "reply-to" is the same as the account address, it leaves it out. ??
> it seems to be that my ISP's mail server is messing with the headers,
> and since the "reply-to" is the same as the account address, it leaves
> it out. ??
Well, here's my present problem. A few months back, easily many
enough so that I a} can't recall which vendor, b} He wouldn't want to
know and c} The boards are no longer current (i.e., at least 2 months),
I bought at the markets a nice "simple" motherboard - Socket 7, IBM
6x86MX/ PR233 (Must mean "public relations", or the medical term,
because it's actually 66MHz x 3) of the "all-in-one" variety = on-board
SVGA eats 4M of system RAM, integrated sound as well as HD, FD, 2S, P,
G, PS/2 (and the mis-labelling of the PS/2 header had me on the run
Well, it set up OK on '95 OSR2 - sort of. Crashed a few time during
install but hey, that's usual isn't it? What got me in the longer term
was that a} it crashes at least once a day in an 8-hour shift, b} often
in the middle of a consultation (oh yes, this was for my surgery!) or
c} quite often at very close to 17:30!
Well, I tried all the tricks. Disable caches, swap RAM modules, then
got wild and re-setup WIN95. That put me out for a week searching the
M$ help database for the place where it says if you re-install with a
network present, it disables your logon to M$ networking by an obscure
registry entry you have to manually kill. Duh!
No way, it is a dud mother. OK, knew I had to do something so I
bought a second hand Octek Rhino 20 motherboard on my next visit to the
markets, no warranty but "supposed" to work. This is an ATX format;
though it has the "old" AT power socket as well as the ATX, its edge
connectors require the ATX case so I bought a new one of those.
(Concept: why buy old style stuff?)
Set it up carefully with the processor and some memory, turned on and
listened for the "no video" beeps. No beeps! However, the keyboard
lights showed it had initialized. Seems its speaker driver is shot and
for that matter, the power button doesn't work either. It comes on
with mains applied, and when I actually fitted video card, disks and
network card, it booted W95, upon shutdown from which the power supply
shuts off, but still doesn't come back on to the front panel button.
I can however live with that.
Well, I let it go through W95's little businesses about figuring out
the video card is different, the PCI bridge is different etc., and got
almost as far as installing the sound card (which doesn't PNP) but now
it hangs halfway from DOS to Windoze. Have to reset it, then it comes
up in Safe mode. Safe mode works fine, but is of course, useless. Next
"proper" boot it hangs.
Went through the rigmarole again - played with caches, re-setup W95
(I've now forgotten the bodgie entries in Registry, so of course, the
network doesn't work at all now). Grrrr! If *only* my script-writing
app would run under Linux, I'd be over in a flash!
Next try is a fresh drive with W98, which is why all the discussion on
O/S is so terribly ironic.
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999
, 2000 only
- New search...