Re: AOL (UK)
- From: "~BD~" <BoaterDave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 13:44:49 -0000
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:go6mao$im6$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
~BD~ wrote:
I have reinstalled Windows XP Home after playing with Ubunto [sic]
(Linux).
You could have saved yourself the anguish by installing Ubuntu as either
a dual-boot with your current Windows, or used the Wubi install where
Ubuntu becomes a 'directory' on your C: drive and with a dual-boot
capability.
When you are ready to formally move to Linux, consider the regular
dual-boot (retaining Windows for a time), then later from Ubuntu,
reformat the NTFS partitions to the Linux file system.
Thanks for your comments Bts. This is all very new to me, but I do have
genuine XP Home plus SP1, 2 and 3 CD's and a Ubuntu CD as well, so it isn't
difficult to revamp everything.
I then used an AOL 9.0VR CD
Is there a compelling reason you actually need AOL? ;-)
I've read in numerous places that their installation is particularly
invasive, especially to the Windows Registry.
Last I heard, the "AOL browser" was simply a title-bar branded Internet
Explorer...
Hahaha! Lots of folk ridicule AOL, I know, but AOL (UK) is now owned by
Carphone Warehouse - one of the UK's major mobile phone companies.
AOL is my *ISP* - I have to have *some* way to connect to the 'net and AOL
is competitive price-wise. One does NOT have to install the AOL software to
utilise the connection. Whilst the AOL Browser is based on Internet
Explorer, it is still quite a complex package, much as it was many years
ago.
HTH
--
Dave
.
- References:
- AOL (UK)
- From: ~BD~
- Re: AOL (UK)
- From: Beauregard T. Shagnasty
- AOL (UK)
- Prev by Date: Re: Preventing WHOIS
- Next by Date: Re: AOL (UK)
- Previous by thread: Re: AOL (UK)
- Next by thread: Re: AOL (UK)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
