|
Posted by Sharon Franks on November 10, 2007, 5:31 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
--
Sharon Franks
MCC group
Microsoft Certified Solutions Developer (MCSD)
Microsoft Certified Trainer (MCT).
> Why choose the word "inflammatory" instead of "helpful" or "advisory," or
> simply, (as you did in this threads' OP), provide the history of that
> particular MS bug, and leave it at that ? Perhaps you're trying to be
> inflammatory on behalf of someone else ? T'hune was good at that !
>
> What a laugh ! ...where in my post did I suggest that I'd
> 'comprehensively researched' the matter ? I did a quick Google at my
> brothers house because I was unfamiliar with the 6 *.dll's that get left
> unregistered after a XP repair/overinstall. My OP here generated that
> knowledge from you, which I thought it would. Why be sarcastic about it ?
>
>
> Regarding the "apology," you're misguidedly seeking on behalf of someone
> else - you've obviously got a sense of humour that I don't understand ! I
> will NOT apologize for something I haven't said or done, and where that
> apology, even if offered for the sake of keeping the peace, would be
> literally unwarranted and supurflous.
>
> My first thought was not give this post the courtesy of a reply but, (in
> view that it was not you who chose to unleash a torrent of vitriol in
> another place, by a different / seemingly and completely irrational
> person), instead will comment for the FINAL time on the matter as below :-
>
> That person who chose, (for some strange and astonishingly irrational and
> deeply unfathomable reason), to misinterpret my post at aumha.org, also
> chose to ignore and distort facts contained in them, that were completely
> clear, as to when and what I'd done, (with regard to to submitting the HJT
> executeable program file to VirusTotal), and which contradict his
> responses. ...anyhow I refuse to argue about that, and him, any more, it's
> boring and time consuming i.e. I've never talked briefly with such an
> unhelpful, (why was he in there?), irrational, illogical and rude person,
> EVER ! ...perhaps he was just having a bad day, or perhaps it was a full
> moon !
>
> I collected Hijackthis.exe v2.02 from aumha.org v2.0.2 (file version
> 2.0.0.2), and just for something to do really, submitted it to the CLS's
> at
> VirusTotal.com, where three of them, highlighted it. I then submitted an
> older version of HJT from my PC archive where only one CLS highlighted
> it. All of that was accurately conveyed in my posts at aumha.org, albeit a
> little jumbled up.
>
> That poster, (whose name is now - very satisfyingly - forever in my
> killfile), at aumha.org obviously didn't want to make any constructive
> comment on that, (which I thought would have been an interesting topic
> regarding HJT causing false positives among the CLS's at VirusTotal, (e.g.
> 2 with the current version and 1 with an older version)), but, immediately
> launched into a torrent of distorted vitriol ...something like. "...you've
> publicly accused aumha of distributing infected software..." ...and
> other wildly fictitious, and almost abusive assumptions, whilst
> simultaneously choosing to ignore pertinent facts that fully contradicted
> his comments ! I deleted what I could from my posts at aumha.org, and
> will not go there again, it's simply not worth wasting breath in there, or
> on him !
>
> Again, I will NOT apologize for something I haven't said or done, and
> where that apology, even if offered for the sake of keeping the peace,
> would be literally unwarranted and supurflous.
>
> regards, Richard
>
>
>> Richard, please do a little basic research before making such
>> inflammatory
>> posts, especially posts about articles that are nearly 2 months' old and
>> poorly reseached in the first place.
>>
>> The following KB article was published in early Oct-07 and was the result
>> of
>> a long campaign (one that was under way long before Scott published his
>> article) on WinXP users' behalf by many MS MVPs:
>>
>> Updates are not installed successfully from Windows Update, from
>> Microsoft
>> Update, or by using Automatic Updates after you repair a Windows XP
>> installation:
>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/943144
>>
>> PS: I still demand that apology.
>> --
>> ~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
>> MS MVP-Windows (IE, OE, Security, Shell/User)
>> AumHa VSOP & Admin http://aumha.net
>> DTS-L http://dts-l.org/
>>
>> RJK wrote:
>>> A little tip, and warning, for those are not aware that an
>>> "over-install"
>>> or
>>> "repair" of your XP platform, using your XP cd, apparently leaves your
>>> system in a condition where Windows Update/s no longer work, and fail !
>>>
>>>
http://windowssecrets.com/2007/09/27/03-Stealth-Windows-update-prevents-XP-repair
>>>
>>> ...scroll down the page a little to view..., and to where you could put
>>> these 6 *.dll registration commands into a batch file to make things a
>>> little swifter :-)
>>>
>>> regsvr32 /s wuapi.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wuaueng1.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wuaueng.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wucltui.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wups2.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wups.dll
>>> regsvr32 /s wuweb.dll
>>>
>>> ...yesterday I cleaned visited my brother in Bournemouth, who had
>>> managed
>>> to
>>> get some malware via an "exploit" into his machine. After
>>> cleaning that up, and my not being happy with how his machine was
>>> performing, I "repair installed" from his XP Home SP2b cd, and after
>>> that,
>>> Windows Update could not work !
>>>
>>> A quick Google revealed:-
>>>
http://windowssecrets.com/2007/09/27/03-Stealth-Windows-update-prevents-XP-repair
>>> ...after that, the 80+ Windows updates installed beautifully.
>>> ...thank goodness for that !!!
>>> ...enjoy :-)
>>>
>>> regards, Richard
>>
>
>
| 
XML site map