Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff
From: Curtis Anderson (nedfla@hotmail.com)
Date: 01/30/03
- Next message: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Previous message: John Brock: "Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- In reply to: John Brock: "Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Next in thread: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Reply: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Reply: John Brock: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Curtis Anderson" <nedfla@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:37:59 -0600
John Brock <jbrock@panix.com> uttered:
> Are there one or two files which
> will bring each up to date, or am I going to have to spend time
> searching out a zillion unrelated fixes?
You're going to have to search out a zillion unrelated fixes. There is hope
though, in the form of http://hfnetchk.shavlik.com , which will tell you
what they are. Hint: Use the -vv option to make it tell you the URLs as
well.
> Applying SP6A installed Internet Explorer 5.00.
No it didn't. IE was updated by someone, on purpose. Applying SP6a to a
fresh NT install results in IE v2.0, which is what ships on the CDROM. I
should know, I just rebuilt the machine beside me this morning ;-)
> All of the security
> updates I see are for IE 5.01 or higher, so I am assuming that I
> have to download a complete new copy of IE, rather than just patching
> IE 5.00. Right?
Right. If you have a copy of the IE5SETUP.EXE from IE 5.5. SP2 you can
still use the web install to update it, or bite the bullet and go with IE 6
SP1. FWIW for minor web browsing, patch downloads, etc. I really haven't
noticed a major performance diff on my aging 486/66/32MB. I do try not to
launch Ie on it unless I really need to though ;-)
> This particular file, q324929.exe, appears in several different
> places in the search, and it appears that it is a cumulative update
> for *all* versions of IE. Is this correct? Is this a property of
> all cumulative IE patches?
No, read the MS Q-article carefully. When you go to download it you will be
asked which IE you are updating.
> Is there anything else I should be downloading? For example, while
> this is emphatically not a multi-media machine maybe I should get
> the latest version of Windows Media Player anyway. (The latest
> version for NT4 seems to be 6.4, and it says a Pentium 166 is
> required. That won't stop the install will it?).
WMP 6.4 installs and runs just fine on a 486/66 with 32 MB. Playback of
true-colour video files *sucks*, but it does work. If you take my
suggestion of the HFNetChk download, you'll also find out that there's a
security patch for it. I have an attitude problem with WMP versions higher
than 6.4 so can't tell you if they would install/work or not.
- Next message: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Previous message: John Brock: "Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- In reply to: John Brock: "Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Next in thread: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Reply: Analysis&Solutions: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Reply: John Brock: "Re: Bringing new NT4 installation up to snuff"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|