Hi All!

[sf]

In

My computer is out of the box and oh, man, it's FAST. Woooo Hooo!
I had no idea what dual channel SDRAM could do. I downloaded over
100,000 news group titles in about 5 seconds flat. But for some
reason, headers in selected groups take a bit longer... I think it
took about 2 minutes to download over 200,000 in one of my news
groups.

<sob>
just kidding

LOL! This is going to be great!

Yes, it's true. It's XP Professional with additional features. I
don't have a list of those additional features handy, but I'm
sure you can easily find them on the Microsoft web site.

Actually, I had already looked it up and what I found wasn't very
helpful. That's why I asked. Thanks anyway.

First, a word on the terminology. You *must* partition it.
Partitioning is the act of creating one or more partitions on the
drive, and without at least one partition, you can't use it.

So I assume what you meant to ask whether you should have more
than one partition.

The partition question was based on the assumption that there is
already ONE partition and I was wondering if two or more would be
beneficial for any reason.

Although some people will tell you "yes," and
others will tell you "no," my answer is "it depends." There's no
answer to this question that's right for everyone. Don't have
multiple partitions just to separate one kind of thing from
another (media vs. work, for example); folders can work just as
well for that.

Thanks. I have always used folders that way and was wondering if
partitions would be of better use. Although it's never happened to
me, I'm always hearing about crashes and figured if it crashes at
least either my media or my data wouldn't be lost... if I had them in
separate partitions.

As puny as 80 GB seems to some here, it's big to me and certainly
could be partitioned. But quite frankly, "partitions" sound like a
lot of work and I'd rather not deal with it unless there is a real
reason. It sounds like I should partition if I wanted to run a
different OS, but not to separate specific applications or things like
media vs. office work.

The main reasons for having multiple partitions,
in my view, are for booting multiple operating systems, and
because a particular partitioning scheme gets along better with
your backup scheme.

So far the verdict is that media edition and Pro are virtually the
same program, so it's a waste of effort to partiton... correct? My
original query was based on the incorrect (?) assumption they were
different.

Are they the "same" in the way Home Office and Office Pro are the same
or are they really identical?

It depends on what features you install, but I'm not an MS Office
expert and I'll leave this question to others.




"Its own file"? Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that.
Do you mean its own folder? It has to be installed into its own
folder. Do you mean its own partition? There no good reason I can
think of to do that.

I misspoke. Folder.

Sorry, I don't understand that either. If it isn't installed, and
you don't have the CD, you can't use the feature.




That's really the kind of question that nobody but you can
answer. You have to judge the likelihood of your wanting some
feature in the future that you don't want now, and weigh that
against the cost in disk space of installing it now.

newsgroups like this make me aware of features I haven't yet
discovered, so I'll have it fully installed into its own folder. I'm
not concerned about disk space. If I was, I would have ordered a
larger HD.

There's not only not a compelling reason, it would probably be a
serious mistake for the great majority of people. Unless you have
a clear reason to do this, don't.

Thanks.
sf

 

[Robert Moir]

Hi Robert... I was kicked off of google for a while (too much
posting).

I was trying to find out what if any difference there are between XP
Pro and media edition. Is ME a full on XP Pro with added goodies or a
cut down version like Home XP? If it's cut down, what's missing?

As far as I know the only thing thats missing is a few networking things
such as the ability to join a Windows Server domain. This usually isn't a
problem for most people who are not on a corporate business network - unless
you know for sure that you will definately be joining this machine to a
domain then I would stick with what you have because thats the only real
difference I can remember and its not at all relevant for 95% of home users.

Let me put it this way, my home usuage isn't typical. I own 4 computers at
home, 1 of which IS a windows 2003 server setup as a domain controller, 1 of
which is is an apple ibook, and 2 of which are windows xp media centre
desktops. And i've got access to all versions of Windows XP because i'm a
MVP with a MSDN subscription so its not like it would be a bother to find
the disks to do it, and i've never felt the need to change either of my
desktop computers from MCE2005 back to XP Pro.

--

 

[Ken Blake]

In

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:39:17 -0700, "Ken Blake"


Thanks. I have always used folders that way and was wondering
if
partitions would be of better use. Although it's never
happened to
me, I'm always hearing about crashes and figured if it crashes
at
least either my media or my data wouldn't be lost... if I had
them in
separate partitions.

That's a typical use of multiple partitions that I'm very much
against. Your data is just barely safer by being in a second
partition, and you should never rely on that. A hard drive crash
will cause the loss of both partitions simultaneously, as can
virus attacks, severe power glitches such as nearby lighning
strickes, theft of the computer, etc.

The way to protect your data is by backing it up to external
media.

As puny as 80 GB seems to some here, it's big to me and
certainly
could be partitioned. But quite frankly, "partitions" sound
like a
lot of work and I'd rather not deal with it unless there is a
real
reason. It sounds like I should partition if I wanted to run a
different OS, but not to separate specific applications or
things like
media vs. office work.

Right.


So far the verdict is that media edition and Pro are virtually
the
same program, so it's a waste of effort to partiton... correct?
My
original query was based on the incorrect (?) assumption they
were
different.

No, I wouldn't say "a waste of effort." Once again, it depends.
If you mean having multiple partitions to install Media Edition
and Professional, *that* makes no sense.

Are they the "same" in the way Home Office and Office Pro are
the same
or are they really identical?

They are identical except that Media Edition includes the extra
media features.

I misspoke. Folder.

OK, folder. But I still don't understand. As I said, "It has to
be installed into its own folder."

newsgroups like this make me aware of features I haven't yet
discovered, so I'll have it fully installed into its own
folder. I'm
not concerned about disk space. If I was, I would have ordered
a
larger HD.


Thanks.

You're welcome. Glad to help.

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

I agree with Robert Moir that you should get a copy of the Office CD
(Office 2003, correct?). It's handy to have when you want to
add/remove features or repair the installation. Most important: When
visiting the Office Update page, it is not unusual to get a request
that the CD be inserted before the updates will install.

Only if you chose to delete the installation files. If you didn't, then no
disc will be called for (though I agree, a backup is always prudent ;o))

 

[Sharon F]

Only if you chose to delete the installation files. If you didn't, then no
disc will be called for (though I agree, a backup is always prudent ;o))

Really? I have retained the setup files on both of my systems and have been
asked to supply the disks with some of the updates. I would wonder why that
happens but since the CDs are always on hand (Office and Front Page) I just
stick them in when prompted. It's less work to do that than to figure out
why. The tablet PC on the other hand gets dragged everywhere and because of
past experiences, I won't update Office on it unless I have the CDs handy.

 

[sf]

As far as I know the only thing thats missing is a few networking things
such as the ability to join a Windows Server domain. This usually isn't a
problem for most people who are not on a corporate business network - unless
you know for sure that you will definately be joining this machine to a
domain then I would stick with what you have because thats the only real
difference I can remember and its not at all relevant for 95% of home users.

Let me put it this way, my home usuage isn't typical. I own 4 computers at
home, 1 of which IS a windows 2003 server setup as a domain controller, 1 of
which is is an apple ibook, and 2 of which are windows xp media centre
desktops. And i've got access to all versions of Windows XP because i'm a
MVP with a MSDN subscription so its not like it would be a bother to find
the disks to do it, and i've never felt the need to change either of my
desktop computers from MCE2005 back to XP Pro.

Thanks Robert! That makes me feel a lot more secure... I can always
have XP Pro installed later if there's a real need for it.


sf

 

[sf]

Really? I have retained the setup files on both of my systems and have been
asked to supply the disks with some of the updates. I would wonder why that
happens but since the CDs are always on hand (Office and Front Page) I just
stick them in when prompted. It's less work to do that than to figure out
why. The tablet PC on the other hand gets dragged everywhere and because of
past experiences, I won't update Office on it unless I have the CDs handy.

Whoa, controversy! That's why I asked. The help disk tech who told
me it could be done apparently has it in a folder on his computer...
but I just couldn't believe in my heart of hearts that it's possible.
Now I know I'm not crazy!

BTW: was that previous comment about licensing really correct? Is it
okay to burn a personal CD when the license is for the entire
district/company? It certainly seems logical, especially when you're
in a situation like mine where IT won't be out to insert the disk for
you in less than a week or two.... if it's that quick.


sf

 

[Sharon F]

Whoa, controversy! That's why I asked. The help disk tech who told
me it could be done apparently has it in a folder on his computer...
but I just couldn't believe in my heart of hearts that it's possible.
Now I know I'm not crazy!

BTW: was that previous comment about licensing really correct? Is it
okay to burn a personal CD when the license is for the entire
district/company? It certainly seems logical, especially when you're
in a situation like mine where IT won't be out to insert the disk for
you in less than a week or two.... if it's that quick.

Not really controversy but a difference between what is supposed to happen
and what can happen.

The setup files I've retained were created by Office Setup. Not quite the
same thing as having a copy of the CD on the hard drive as you've
mentioned. Office 2003 setup prompt if you want to retain setup files or
not. If you have the hard disk space and keep them, they *will* be used for
on the fly repairs of the Office programs. Apparently in theory they should
cover you at Windows update as well but that has not happened for me.

Aside: I did direct them to a different hard drive instead of using the
default location. This is an option that is offered from the same prompt
but maybe the different location is why Office Update asks me for the CD
when it shouldn't.

And yes. I believe the previous comment about licensing is correct. Think
of the license as being bound to the set of 25 characters needed to install
the product instead of tied to the CD. You can use any CD of the same type
with your key and it will successfully install. Office Standard key with an
Office Standard CD. Office Enterprise key with Office Enterprise CD (or
whatever they're calling the different packages this time around). You get
the idea, I'm sure. Keep in mind that even though the company license is
broad, IT should be recording who has what installed in case they are
subjected to a software audit.

And if you read the license (boring but can be done ) it even states
that a duplicate of the install CD can be created for backup purposes. Many
folks prefer to use that duplicate CD instead of their original. This
practice protects the original disk against wear and tear.

Caveat: Some software will have copyright protection builtin to the CD
which causes the program to install *only* from the original disk but that
is not the case with Office. Commonly seen with disks for PC games.

 

[sf]

Not really controversy but a difference between what is supposed to happen
and what can happen.

The setup files I've retained were created by Office Setup. Not quite the
same thing as having a copy of the CD on the hard drive as you've
mentioned. Office 2003 setup prompt if you want to retain setup files or
not. If you have the hard disk space and keep them, they *will* be used for
on the fly repairs of the Office programs. Apparently in theory they should
cover you at Windows update as well but that has not happened for me.

Aside: I did direct them to a different hard drive instead of using the
default location. This is an option that is offered from the same prompt
but maybe the different location is why Office Update asks me for the CD
when it shouldn't.

Maybe my next computer will have two hard drives, but I don't even
know if this one has more than one bay for a HD. I feel lucky just to
have both a CD and a DVD.

And yes. I believe the previous comment about licensing is correct. Think
of the license as being bound to the set of 25 characters needed to install
the product instead of tied to the CD. You can use any CD of the same type
with your key and it will successfully install. Office Standard key with an
Office Standard CD. Office Enterprise key with Office Enterprise CD (or
whatever they're calling the different packages this time around). You get
the idea, I'm sure. Keep in mind that even though the company license is
broad, IT should be recording who has what installed in case they are
subjected to a software audit.

I'm sure they do... they are well aquainted with the wrath of
Microsoft. LOL!

And if you read the license (boring but can be done ) it even states
that a duplicate of the install CD can be created for backup purposes. Many
folks prefer to use that duplicate CD instead of their original. This
practice protects the original disk against wear and tear.

I'll have them burn me a copy AND install it to a separete folder. I
absolutely hate searching for CDs (even when they're where they're
supposed to be).

Caveat: Some software will have copyright protection builtin to the CD
which causes the program to install *only* from the original disk but that
is not the case with Office. Commonly seen with disks for PC games.

Glad you brought that up... it's my experience that yes, you can
"install" them, but to RUN them you still need to insert the disk
every time. Is there some way around that problem?

````````````````````````````

 

[Sharon F]

Glad you brought that up... it's my experience that yes, you can
"install" them, but to RUN them you still need to insert the disk
every time. Is there some way around that problem?

I've had them flatout not install where it's possible to install the entire
game onto the hard drive.

There are other games (and other types of software) that have an install CD
and a Run CD. With some of these you can use something like Virtual Drive
(http://www.farstone.com/) to create a virtual CD drive. But have seen some
copyrighted CDs balk at working with this solution as well.

 

[Sharon F]

I've had them flatout not install where it's possible to install the entire
game onto the hard drive.

Edit that to "where it should be possible to install the entire game"
(Original post written early on a Sunday. What can I say?)

 

[sf]

I've had them flatout not install where it's possible to install the entire
game onto the hard drive.

There are other games (and other types of software) that have an install CD
and a Run CD. With some of these you can use something like Virtual Drive
(http://www.farstone.com/) to create a virtual CD drive. But have seen some
copyrighted CDs balk at working with this solution as well.

Thanks, Sharon... I'll take a look at Virtual Drive.


sf

 

[Sharon F]

Thanks, Sharon... I'll take a look at Virtual Drive.

You're welcome, sf and good luck!