"Support"

I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of the
world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup). The one
"helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft. After
attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
"collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that going
back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at that
point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and analyzing
data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer has
encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting to send
the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen, until the
main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously doubt that the
actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole excersize moot, but that
was the only way I could do it.

Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original suspicion
that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and they
would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
because supposedly they could help me via that method.

To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party, which
is exactly how I started this in the first place.

In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail. These
links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to the
actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links worked.
After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page, which
referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to find
that it directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
didn't work.

Once again, I'm still at my wits end. The last time I posted a question on
this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded to me in a way that I deemed
immature and arrogant. I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner that
also implored others to be serious. As Microsoft apparently had a problem
with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in the
spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.

On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:02:02 -0700, G1811 wrote:

<snip for brevity>

> Once again, I'm still at my wits end.

Start anew!
How to remove Windows XP Service Pack 3 from your computer
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950249

Things to do prior downloadin/installing SP3.
1.Make an Image backup of the hard drive/Windows Partition before you
install SP3
2.Test your System Restore to see if it is working correctly.
3.Make absolutely sure the machine's free of any hijackware, Trojan, or
virus infections before installing SP3.
4.Run Disk Cleanup then run a Defrag session before installing SP3.
5.Disable all real-time protections (anti-virus; anti-spyware;third-party
firewall) before downloading/installing SP3.
6.Reboot twice after installing SP3.
7.Run another Defrag.

Detailed information:
WinXP SP3 - Read all prerequisites for a successful installation
http://msmvps.com/blogs/harrywaldron...tallation.aspx

Steps to take before you install Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950717

Windows XP Service Pack 3 Overview
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

Release Notes for Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/936929
http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...1/relnotes.htm
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...playlang=en&tm

The hard disk space requirements for Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947311

Some third-party programs may experience a change in functionality after
you install Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947309

How to obtain the latest Windows XP service pack
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/322389

Create an Automated System Recovery set using Backup
http://technet2.microsoft.com/window....mspx?mfr=true

How to Set up and Use Automated System Recovery in Windows XP
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l.../bb456980.aspx

Installing Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3)
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/w.../cc164204.aspx

Windows XP Service Pack 3 - ISO-9660 CD Image File:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

Windows XP Service Pack 3 Network Installation Package for IT Professionals
and Developers
(Single installations for PCs can use the same file)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

Recover from a system failure using Automated System Recovery
http://technet2.microsoft.com/window....mspx?mfr=true

Error message when you try to install Windows XP Service Pack 3: "Access is
denied" or "Service Pack installation did not complete"
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/949377

If you don't like the answers provided here go to:
Use this forum for all issues related to Windows XP SP3
http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/...2010&SiteID=17

Good luck

G1811 wrote:
> I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the
> rest of the world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the
> newsgroup). The one "helpful" response I got was to send a service
> report to Microsoft. After attempting SEVERAL times to do this,
> only to have the program stall on "collecting and analyzing data,"
> I found that the only way to make it go through was to refresh the
> page after it stalled. I also found that going back one page, and
> then forward again several times worked. However, at that point,
> instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and analyzing
> data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer
> has encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After
> attempting to send the report several times, I finally left that
> window on the screen, until the main window showed that the report
> had been sent. I seriously doubt that the actual data had been
> sent, which rendered the whole excersize moot, but that was the
> only way I could do it.
>
> Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original
> suspicion that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a
> cookie-cutter resonse telling me to contact support via phone,
> e-mail, or chat, and they would take care of me. This was after I
> received the original newsgroup response telling me to send the
> report to Microsoft in the first place, because supposedly they
> could help me via that method.
>
> To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back,
> because instead of sending the service report, along with the
> uploaded system information, I am expected to simply describe my
> problems third party, which is exactly how I started this in the
> first place.
>
> In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment,
> along with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the
> E-mail. These links were to a comment section for the originator's
> supervisor, and to the actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section.
> Neither of these links worked. After discovering this, I clicked
> the link at the right of the page, which referred to contacted
> Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to find that it
> directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
> didn't work.
>
> Once again, I'm still at my wits end. The last time I posted a
> question on this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded to me in a
> way that I deemed immature and arrogant. I attempted to resond to
> him in a mature manner that also implored others to be serious. As
> Microsoft apparently had a problem with that, I will now ask anyone
> that responds here actually do so in the spirit of help, and not
> arrogance, or misguided superiority.

SP3 troubleshooting...

A place to get FREE support for SP3 installation issues *from Microsoft*...
http://support.microsoft.com/oas/def...3&gprid=522131

Windows XP Service Pack 3 - ISO-9660 CD Image File
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...DisplayLang=en

Windows XP Service Pack 3 Network Installation Package for IT Professionals
and Developers
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

WinXP SP3 - Read all prerequisites for a successful installation
http://msmvps.com/blogs/harrywaldron...tallation.aspx

Steps to take before you install Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/950717

Release Notes for Windows XP Service Pack 3
http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...1/relnotes.htm

Key things to note:

Internet Explorer:
"If you have installed Windows Internet Explorer® 7 or a beta version of
Internet Explorer 8, and then install Windows XP SP3, you cannot uninstall
Internet Explorer. To avoid this, ensure Internet Explorer 7 or a beta
version of Internet Explorer 8 is not installed before installing Windows XP
SP3. If you have already encountered this issue, uninstall Windows XP SP3,
uninstall Internet Explorer, and then reinstall Windows XP SP3."

Windows XP Media Center Edition 2002:
"If you install Windows XP SP3 on a computer running Windows XP Media Center
Edition 2002 with SP1, Windows XP Media Center Edition may malfunction. To
avoid this, install Windows XP SP2 before you install Windows XP SP3. If
this issue has already occurred, uninstall Windows XP SP3, install Windows
XP SP2, and then reinstall Windows XP SP3."

It seems some people are unable to get further updates after installing
SP3... Seems some have experienced a symptom similar to doing a repair
installation on Windows XP - and the same fix seems to work for them for
that...

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

Some people experience an "endless reboot" issue...

From PA Bear [MS MVP]:
Workarounds:

http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...ng-xp-sp3.aspx
[NB: The above has been updated many times and now includes "a small tool
that will detect the IntelPPM problem and mitigate it before installing
[WinXP SP3]."

1. Boot into Safe Mode and rename INTELPMM.SYS to INTELPMM.OLD.
2. After booting into Safe Mode:
Start --> Run --> (copy/paste)
sc config intelppm start= disabled
--> OK --> Reboot into normal (Windows) mode.

Other references include:
.. http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?p=187790#p187790
..
http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...ng-xp-sp3.aspx
.. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...boots_crashes/
..
http://www.computerworld.com/action/...icleId=9084418
.. You receive a "Stop 0x0000007E" error message after you upgrade to Windows
XP Service Pack 2 or Service Pack 3 on a non-Intel-processor-based computer
(Revised 06 May-08)
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888372

Some people have gotten an "Access Denied" message when trying to install
SP3... Method 3 of this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/949377

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

1. Always reply to your original thread, please
(http://groups.google.com/group/micro...51bcde565a9152).

2. I asked you to provide the complete/verbatim error message. Your reply
included "Setup cannot copy the file XXXXX.XXX". Robert's reaction to this
certainly was NOT immature or arrogant. (I thought the same thing and
decided to throw in the towel and send you to MS Support.)

3. Given these further details, I'd suspect that a hijackware infection is
the cause of all your issues, in which case, you have 2 options:

=> Format & reinstall Windows (a Repair Install will NOT help); or

=> Run a /thorough/ check for hijackware, including posting your hijackthis
log to an appropriate forum.

Checking for/Help with Hijackware
http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm
http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm
http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=5878
http://wiki.castlecops.com/Malware_R...:_Introduction
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/data/prevention.htm
http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/tshoot.html
http://www.mvps.org/sramesh2k/Malware_Defence.htm
http://defendingyourmachine2.blogspot.com/
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/...moving_Malware

When all else fails, HijackThis v2.0.2
(http://aumha.org/downloads/hijackthis.exe) is the preferred tool to use (in
conjuction with some other utilities). HijackThis will NOT fix anything on
its own, but it will help you to both identify and remove any
hijackware/spyware with assistance from an expert. **Post your log to
http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=30,
http://forums.spybot.info/forumdisplay.php?f=22,
http://castlecops.com/forum67.html, or other appropriate forums for review
by an expert in such matters, not here.**

If the procedures look too complex - and there is no shame in admitting this
isn't your cup of tea - take the machine to a local, reputable and
independent (i.e., not BigBoxStoreUSA or Geek Squad) computer repair shop.
--
~PA Bear


G1811 wrote:
> I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of
> the
> world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup). The
> one
> "helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft. After
> attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
> "collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
> through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that going
> back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at
> that point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and
> analyzing data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer
> has encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting to
> send the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen,
> until the main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously
> doubt that the actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole
> excersize moot, but that was the only way I could do it.
>
> Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original
> suspicion
> that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
> resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and they
> would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
> response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
> because supposedly they could help me via that method.
>
> To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
> instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
> information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party,
> which
> is exactly how I started this in the first place.
>
> In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
> with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail.
> These
> links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to
> the
> actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links worked.
> After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page, which
> referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to
> find
> that it directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
> didn't work.
>
> Once again, I'm still at my wits end. The last time I posted a question
> on
> this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded to me in a way that I deemed
> immature and arrogant. I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner
> that
> also implored others to be serious. As Microsoft apparently had a problem
> with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in the
> spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.

(interleaved comments)
"G1811" <> wrote in message
news:4CE98D89-0387-4F6A-A932-...
>I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of the
> world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup).


The only issue I had with XPsp3 is that its download seemed to get stuck
in a suspended state by BITS. Once I noticed that I was able to get it fully
downloaded and installed fine, without any further trouble at all.


> The one
> "helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft. After
> attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
> "collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
> through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that going
> back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at that
> point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and analyzing
> data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer has
> encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting to send
> the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen, until the
> main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously doubt that the
> actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole excersize moot, but that
> was the only way I could do it.
>
> Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original suspicion
> that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
> resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and they
> would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
> response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
> because supposedly they could help me via that method.
>
> To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
> instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
> information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party, which
> is exactly how I started this in the first place.
>
> In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
> with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail. These
> links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to the
> actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links worked.
> After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page, which
> referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to find
> that it directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
> didn't work.
>
> Once again, I'm still at my wits end.

> The last time I posted a question on this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded


....with an amused interjection regarding your implied definition of "verbatim":

http://www.microsoft.com/communities...1-ec58d935929f

<quote>
I intentionally XXed out the file, because, as I stated in my original
message, the files have been different each time.
</quote>


> to me in a way that I deemed immature and arrogant.


Not to you. To your thread. Realize that you are posting in a newsgroup.


> I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner that also implored others to be serious.


How? Where? ; }



> As Microsoft apparently had a problem
> with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in the
> spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.


If you would post *all* details of your *symptoms* instead of your interpretations
of them someone might try to help you. Remember, your words have to substitute
for what our eyes might notice. In the particular case of module names, there could
be useful clues about a particular component that is incorrectly installed or needs to
be repaired. Also, from your other remarks about using your browser to report your
symptoms to Microsoft one would wonder about whether it (which you haven't specified)
is another symptom of your problem (whatever that turns out to be.)


Good luck

Robert
---

Okay, I posted a ligitimate request for help, and received the response "Oh,
really . . .," becuase the resonder had a problem with the choice of words
that I used in said response. I might add, that this choice of words was
used at your specific request. I would also add that my response explicitly
stated the reasons why I worded my response as I did. Mind you, this
response was received in a newsgroup that is intended for actual help, not
requests for grammatical correction. . .yeah, I consider that arrogant and
immature. Especially considering the fact that I continued to explain
exactly why I did such.

You defending Robert's lack of any help what so ever, and claiming that he
might have been actually right in responding they way that he did. . .I
consider arrogant as well. Notice, I didn't say immature, because at least
you had the maturity to engage me as a human being, instead of excersizing in
an online version of "na, na, I'm smarter than you, and I just wanted you to
know that."

Now, as for your request for me to include this in my original thread. . .I
actually tried. It was only until now that I realized that they hadn't been.
I've been posting these replies in the same original thread, but for some
reason, Microsoft has been posting them seperately. For example, I've made
reference to Microsoft deleting prior posts, only to find them in new posts
now. You might want to look into that too, it seems the newsgroup is broken.
If it makes any difference, I posted yet another response to Robert's
immature and arrogant response back in the original post. I checked, it's
actually there. You should be happy.

As for your defending of Robert's "opinion," I would direct you to my
original post, in which I expressly told you that the reason why I wasn't
including the file name was because it had been a different file each time.
Instead of blaming me for being obtuse, or deliberately not giving enough
information, I suggest you just admit that you're out of your depth, and call
it a day. Passing the buck might be easy, but it doesn't mean that it's
correct.

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

> 1. Always reply to your original thread, please
> (http://groups.google.com/group/micro...51bcde565a9152).
>
> 2. I asked you to provide the complete/verbatim error message. Your reply
> included "Setup cannot copy the file XXXXX.XXX". Robert's reaction to this
> certainly was NOT immature or arrogant. (I thought the same thing and
> decided to throw in the towel and send you to MS Support.)
>
> 3. Given these further details, I'd suspect that a hijackware infection is
> the cause of all your issues, in which case, you have 2 options:
>
> => Format & reinstall Windows (a Repair Install will NOT help); or
>
> => Run a /thorough/ check for hijackware, including posting your hijackthis
> log to an appropriate forum.
>
> Checking for/Help with Hijackware
> http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm
> http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm
> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=5878
> http://wiki.castlecops.com/Malware_R...:_Introduction
> http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
> http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/data/prevention.htm
> http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/tshoot.html
> http://www.mvps.org/sramesh2k/Malware_Defence.htm
> http://defendingyourmachine2.blogspot.com/
> http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/...moving_Malware
>
> When all else fails, HijackThis v2.0.2
> (http://aumha.org/downloads/hijackthis.exe) is the preferred tool to use (in
> conjuction with some other utilities). HijackThis will NOT fix anything on
> its own, but it will help you to both identify and remove any
> hijackware/spyware with assistance from an expert. **Post your log to
> http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=30,
> http://forums.spybot.info/forumdisplay.php?f=22,
> http://castlecops.com/forum67.html, or other appropriate forums for review
> by an expert in such matters, not here.**
>
> If the procedures look too complex - and there is no shame in admitting this
> isn't your cup of tea - take the machine to a local, reputable and
> independent (i.e., not BigBoxStoreUSA or Geek Squad) computer repair shop.
> --
> ~PA Bear
>
>
> G1811 wrote:
> > I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of
> > the
> > world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup). The
> > one
> > "helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft. After
> > attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
> > "collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
> > through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that going
> > back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at
> > that point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and
> > analyzing data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer
> > has encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting to
> > send the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen,
> > until the main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously
> > doubt that the actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole
> > excersize moot, but that was the only way I could do it.
> >
> > Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original
> > suspicion
> > that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
> > resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and they
> > would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
> > response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
> > because supposedly they could help me via that method.
> >
> > To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
> > instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
> > information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party,
> > which
> > is exactly how I started this in the first place.
> >
> > In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
> > with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail.
> > These
> > links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to
> > the
> > actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links worked.
> > After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page, which
> > referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to
> > find
> > that it directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
> > didn't work.
> >
> > Once again, I'm still at my wits end. The last time I posted a question
> > on
> > this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded to me in a way that I deemed
> > immature and arrogant. I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner
> > that
> > also implored others to be serious. As Microsoft apparently had a problem
> > with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in the
> > spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.
>
>

"Robert Aldwinckle" wrote:

> (interleaved comments)
> "G1811" <> wrote in message
> news:4CE98D89-0387-4F6A-A932-...
> >I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of the
> > world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup).
>
>
> The only issue I had with XPsp3 is that its download seemed to get stuck
> in a suspended state by BITS. Once I noticed that I was able to get it fully
> downloaded and installed fine, without any further trouble at all.

I appreciate the attempt at help, but let's be honest, that isn't why you
wrote this response. Let's continue downward. . .
>
>
> > The one
> > "helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft. After
> > attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
> > "collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
> > through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that going
> > back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at that
> > point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and analyzing
> > data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet Explorer has
> > encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting to send
> > the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen, until the
> > main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously doubt that the
> > actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole excersize moot, but that
> > was the only way I could do it.
> >
> > Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original suspicion
> > that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
> > resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and they
> > would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
> > response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
> > because supposedly they could help me via that method.
> >
> > To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
> > instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
> > information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party, which
> > is exactly how I started this in the first place.
> >
> > In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
> > with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail. These
> > links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to the
> > actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links worked.
> > After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page, which
> > referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to find
> > that it directed me back to the support report program that I already knew
> > didn't work.
> >
> > Once again, I'm still at my wits end.
>
> > The last time I posted a question on this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded
>
>
.. . .with an arrogant and immature attempt to express his supposed
intellectual "superiority" over me (see, Robert, I can change messages, too.
.. .
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/communities...1-ec58d935929f
>
> <quote>
> I intentionally XXed out the file, because, as I stated in my original
> message, the files have been different each time.
> </quote>
>
>
> > to me in a way that I deemed immature and arrogant.
>
>
> Not to you. To your thread. Realize that you are posting in a newsgroup.

I'm sorry, but I don't see your differentiation, here. If you respond
directly to a post I make in the newsgroup, do you not respond directly to
me? Furthermore, if your response is terse, without any actual helpful
information, whatsoever, except for two words and an incorrectly typed
puncuation mark, how is that benefitial to the newsgroup, and not directly
aimed at me? As an extreme, if you were to do something that I deemed
incorrect or incomplete, would it benefit you more for me to explain my
viewpoint and request more information, or to say "you're stupid?" I know
you'll probably argue this, but, dude, you told me "you're stupid."
>
>
> > I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner that also implored others to be serious.
>
>
> How? Where? ; }
I have to apologize here. . .I attempted to respond a couple of times here,
only to find out tonight that some of the responses where posted as separate
threads. I invite anyone interested to search for posts under my username.
The posts I refer to will be easy to find. However, I can tell you that
Microsoft did delete the original message. For your benefit, I'll sumarize
it here:

What is your point?

Not the point of your post, but the point of your existing in this world?

Please, in the future, if you have nothing actually helpful to say, don't
post at all.

The conspiracy theorist in me wants to read more in the wink that you gave
in the end, since I've already established that my original response was
deleted. However, in the interest of actual dialogue, I'll leave that alone.

>
>
>
> > As Microsoft apparently had a problem
> > with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in the
> > spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.
>
>
> If you would post *all* details of your *symptoms* instead of your interpretations
> of them someone might try to help you. Remember, your words have to substitute
> for what our eyes might notice. In the particular case of module names, there could
> be useful clues about a particular component that is incorrectly installed or needs to
> be repaired. Also, from your other remarks about using your browser to report your
> symptoms to Microsoft one would wonder about whether it (which you haven't specified)
> is another symptom of your problem (whatever that turns out to be.)

As I stated in my original post, I DID post all of the details of my
symptoms. One of those symptoms was that the file specified was different
each time. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit into your easy-peasy world of
computer fixes, but it doesn't make the symptom any less valid. If you feel
more at ease blaming the problem on the lack of information from me, the
stupid @$$ user who has the ablity to describe the problem fully, then by all
means, do so. However, don't go on a public form and post something that has
no effect other than to make me seem less than what I am. I will not stand
for it, and I'm sure you wouldn't, either.
>
>
> Good luck
>
> Robert
> ---

Good luck to yourself, as well, Robert. I hope that you've learned
something from this message. Just because you're looking at a computer
screen, doesn't mean there isn't a person on the other end, with feeling and
opinions they have no problems expressing.
>
>
>

Then we shall leave you to your own devices. <plonk>

G1811 wrote:
> Okay, I posted a ligitimate request for help, and received the response
> "Oh,
> really . . .," becuase the resonder had a problem with the choice of words
> that I used in said response. I might add, that this choice of words was
> used at your specific request. I would also add that my response
> explicitly
> stated the reasons why I worded my response as I did. Mind you, this
> response was received in a newsgroup that is intended for actual help, not
> requests for grammatical correction. . .yeah, I consider that arrogant and
> immature. Especially considering the fact that I continued to explain
> exactly why I did such.
>
> You defending Robert's lack of any help what so ever, and claiming that he
> might have been actually right in responding they way that he did. . .I
> consider arrogant as well. Notice, I didn't say immature, because at
> least
> you had the maturity to engage me as a human being, instead of excersizing
> in an online version of "na, na, I'm smarter than you, and I just wanted
> you to know that."
>
> Now, as for your request for me to include this in my original thread. .
> .I
> actually tried. It was only until now that I realized that they hadn't
> been. I've been posting these replies in the same original thread, but for
> some reason, Microsoft has been posting them seperately. For example,
> I've
> made reference to Microsoft deleting prior posts, only to find them in new
> posts now. You might want to look into that too, it seems the newsgroup
> is
> broken. If it makes any difference, I posted yet another response to
> Robert's immature and arrogant response back in the original post. I
> checked, it's actually there. You should be happy.
>
> As for your defending of Robert's "opinion," I would direct you to my
> original post, in which I expressly told you that the reason why I wasn't
> including the file name was because it had been a different file each
> time.
> Instead of blaming me for being obtuse, or deliberately not giving enough
> information, I suggest you just admit that you're out of your depth, and
> call it a day. Passing the buck might be easy, but it doesn't mean that
> it's correct.
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:
>
>> 1. Always reply to your original thread, please
>> (http://groups.google.com/group/micro...51bcde565a9152).
>>
>> 2. I asked you to provide the complete/verbatim error message. Your
>> reply
>> included "Setup cannot copy the file XXXXX.XXX". Robert's reaction to
>> this
>> certainly was NOT immature or arrogant. (I thought the same thing and
>> decided to throw in the towel and send you to MS Support.)
>>
>> 3. Given these further details, I'd suspect that a hijackware infection
>> is
>> the cause of all your issues, in which case, you have 2 options:
>>
>> => Format & reinstall Windows (a Repair Install will NOT help); or
>>
>> => Run a /thorough/ check for hijackware, including posting your
>> hijackthis
>> log to an appropriate forum.
>>
>> Checking for/Help with Hijackware
>> http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm
>> http://aumha.org/a/quickfix.htm
>> http://aumha.net/viewtopic.php?t=5878
>> http://wiki.castlecops.com/Malware_R...:_Introduction
>> http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm
>> http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/data/prevention.htm
>> http://inetexplorer.mvps.org/tshoot.html
>> http://www.mvps.org/sramesh2k/Malware_Defence.htm
>> http://defendingyourmachine2.blogspot.com/
>> http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/...moving_Malware
>>
>> When all else fails, HijackThis v2.0.2
>> (http://aumha.org/downloads/hijackthis.exe) is the preferred tool to use
>> (in conjuction with some other utilities). HijackThis will NOT fix
>> anything on its own, but it will help you to both identify and remove any
>> hijackware/spyware with assistance from an expert. **Post your log to
>> http://aumha.net/viewforum.php?f=30,
>> http://forums.spybot.info/forumdisplay.php?f=22,
>> http://castlecops.com/forum67.html, or other appropriate forums for
>> review
>> by an expert in such matters, not here.**
>>
>> If the procedures look too complex - and there is no shame in admitting
>> this isn't your cup of tea - take the machine to a local, reputable and
>> independent (i.e., not BigBoxStoreUSA or Geek Squad) computer repair
>> shop.
>> --
>> ~PA Bear
>>
>>
>> G1811 wrote:
>>> I have been having problems with Service Pack 3, along with the rest of
>>> the
>>> world (see Service Pack 3 Installation Problems in the newsgroup). The
>>> one
>>> "helpful" response I got was to send a service report to Microsoft.
>>> After
>>> attempting SEVERAL times to do this, only to have the program stall on
>>> "collecting and analyzing data," I found that the only way to make it go
>>> through was to refresh the page after it stalled. I also found that
>>> going
>>> back one page, and then forward again several times worked. However, at
>>> that point, instead of stalling at 80% and still on "collecting and
>>> analyzing data," thw page went to 100%, only to flash a "Internet
>>> Explorer
>>> has encountered an error, and must shut down" window. After attempting
>>> to
>>> send the report several times, I finally left that window on the screen,
>>> until the main window showed that the report had been sent. I seriously
>>> doubt that the actual data had been sent, which rendered the whole
>>> excersize moot, but that was the only way I could do it.
>>>
>>> Today, I received a response that didn't even confirm my original
>>> suspicion
>>> that the report hadn't actually been sent. I received a cookie-cutter
>>> resonse telling me to contact support via phone, e-mail, or chat, and
>>> they
>>> would take care of me. This was after I received the original newsgroup
>>> response telling me to send the report to Microsoft in the first place,
>>> because supposedly they could help me via that method.
>>>
>>> To me, it seems I've gone one step forward, and two steps back, because
>>> instead of sending the service report, along with the uploaded system
>>> information, I am expected to simply describe my problems third party,
>>> which
>>> is exactly how I started this in the first place.
>>>
>>> In addition, and this is why this is a question and not a comment, along
>>> with the cookie-cutter response, I received two links in the E-mail.
>>> These
>>> links were to a comment section for the originator's supervisor, and to
>>> the
>>> actual telephone, E-mail, or chat section. Neither of these links
>>> worked.
>>> After discovering this, I clicked the link at the right of the page,
>>> which
>>> referred to contacted Microsoft via E-mail, telephone, or chat, only to
>>> find
>>> that it directed me back to the support report program that I already
>>> knew
>>> didn't work.
>>>
>>> Once again, I'm still at my wits end. The last time I posted a question
>>> on
>>> this board, "Robert Aldwinckle" responded to me in a way that I deemed
>>> immature and arrogant. I attempted to resond to him in a mature manner
>>> that
>>> also implored others to be serious. As Microsoft apparently had a
>>> problem
>>> with that, I will now ask anyone that responds here actually do so in
>>> the
>>> spirit of help, and not arrogance, or misguided superiority.

> If you would post *all* details of your *symptoms* instead of your
interpretations
> of them someone might try to help you. Remember, your words have to substitute
> for what our eyes might notice. In the particular case of module names, there could
> be useful clues about a particular component that is incorrectly installed or needs to
> be repaired. Also, from your other remarks about using your browser to report your
> symptoms to Microsoft one would wonder about whether it (which you haven't specified)
> is another symptom of your problem (whatever that turns out to be.)
>
>
> Good luck
>
> Robert
> ---
>

I've tried this, many times now, but I will try this again. . .

Could it possibly be, that the one part that I left out of the post, is
because it's the one part that HAS NOT, and HAS NEVER BEEN static?

That can't be the issue. Or might it be? Could it be that I described it
as such from the very beginning?

I don't mean to get existential on you, but you just don't seem to be
getting the point.

If there is a question that is stumping you, it must be because you don't
have the exact information. It can't be that the parts left out, in
conjunction with the very reason WHY they were left out, could actually help
someone that actually knows what they're doing.

The fact is, AS I STATED BEFORE, the file name was left out because it is
NOT a single file that is specified. It is a different file, EACH AND EVERY
TIME. If you want an exact typing of the files that appear in the error
(there are over a dozen, now), then I suggest you go to your file directory,
and take a random sampling of them. If you don't think that's helpful, then
perhaps then, you will see the point of me excluding them.

This is not interpretation, this is basic freaking logic. If you can't get
that, then stop posting on this board, because you're wasting our time. You
haven't posted a single helpful thing here.

As for my posting about my problems with using my browser to report the
problem, I agree with you, that may be part of my problem. I should probably
post that on the board for advise. Oh wait, I did. Gee. . .I guess it
doesn't make sense that you brought that up.

I will make this request, again. You're not being helpful. You're just
trying to be the smartest guy on the board. Stop posting. I'll admit it.
You're the smartest guy on the board. You're the smartest guy on the planet.
Go back to your basement and be smart there. Just shut the hell up on this
board.

"G1811" <> wrote in message
news:E9529B95-7092-436D-9585-...
>
> This is not interpretation, this is basic freaking logic. If you can't
> get
> that, then stop posting on this board, because you're wasting our time.
> You
> haven't posted a single helpful thing here.


I suggest that by now you will have been plonked by most of the regulars
here...

This is mine.

PLONK!