"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
news:OsHYB19tJHA.2148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
> Aardvark wrote:
>| On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:34:49 -0400, PCR wrote:
>|
>| <Don't know, couldn't separate his post from that to which
>| he was replying- gave up trying within ten seconds.>
>
> Huh?
>
>| --
>| The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary
>| of the laying of the keel of the most famous (or infamous)
>| ocean liner of all time, RMS Titanic, at Harland & Wolff
>| shipyard in Belfast. <
>| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
>
> I didn't like that movie.
I've never seen that movie, I prefer Resnais or Rivette or
Tarkovsky or even Don Siegel (Invasion of the Body Snatchers,
ORIGINAL ver. from 50's), but I /have/ seen it rated /both/ best
AND worst film of all time in different polls.
explorer "invalid page fault"
Moderators: DllAdmin, DLLADMIN ONLY
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
Aardvark wrote:
| On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:02:29 -0400, PCR wrote:
|
|> Aardvark wrote:
|> | On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:34:49 -0400, PCR wrote: | | <Don't know,
|> couldn't separate his post from that to which he was | replying-
|> gave up trying within ten seconds.>
|>
|> Huh?
|
| You wouldn't understand, as you don't use a proper newsreader. Hell,
| it doesn't even trim sigs from the posts to which you're replying.
I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my signature.
And OE-Quotefix's help states...
"Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if any)
of the message you reply to."
But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
| --
| The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the
| laying of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of
| all time, RMS Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
| < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:02:29 -0400, PCR wrote:
|
|> Aardvark wrote:
|> | On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:34:49 -0400, PCR wrote: | | <Don't know,
|> couldn't separate his post from that to which he was | replying-
|> gave up trying within ten seconds.>
|>
|> Huh?
|
| You wouldn't understand, as you don't use a proper newsreader. Hell,
| it doesn't even trim sigs from the posts to which you're replying.
I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my signature.
And OE-Quotefix's help states...
"Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if any)
of the message you reply to."
But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
| --
| The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the
| laying of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of
| all time, RMS Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
| < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
thanatoid wrote:
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:OsHYB19tJHA.2148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
|
|> Aardvark wrote:
|>| On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:34:49 -0400, PCR wrote:
|>|
|>| <Don't know, couldn't separate his post from that to which
|>| he was replying- gave up trying within ten seconds.>
|>
|> Huh?
|>
|>| --
|>| The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary
|>| of the laying of the keel of the most famous (or infamous)
|>| ocean liner of all time, RMS Titanic, at Harland & Wolff
|>| shipyard in Belfast. <
|>| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
|>
|> I didn't like that movie.
|
| I've never seen that movie, I prefer Resnais or Rivette or
| Tarkovsky or even Don Siegel (Invasion of the Body Snatchers,
| ORIGINAL ver. from 50's), but I /have/ seen it rated /both/ best
| AND worst film of all time in different polls.
Generally, I hate doppelgander movies too! Everyone should stay in their
own body!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:OsHYB19tJHA.2148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:
|
|> Aardvark wrote:
|>| On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:34:49 -0400, PCR wrote:
|>|
|>| <Don't know, couldn't separate his post from that to which
|>| he was replying- gave up trying within ten seconds.>
|>
|> Huh?
|>
|>| --
|>| The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary
|>| of the laying of the keel of the most famous (or infamous)
|>| ocean liner of all time, RMS Titanic, at Harland & Wolff
|>| shipyard in Belfast. <
|>| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
|>
|> I didn't like that movie.
|
| I've never seen that movie, I prefer Resnais or Rivette or
| Tarkovsky or even Don Siegel (Invasion of the Body Snatchers,
| ORIGINAL ver. from 50's), but I /have/ seen it rated /both/ best
| AND worst film of all time in different polls.
Generally, I hate doppelgander movies too! Everyone should stay in their
own body!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
thanatoid wrote:
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:e3vTjl9tJHA.4364@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
|
|> thanatoid wrote:
|>| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
|>| news:u31WnrxtJHA.4452@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
|>|
|>|> thanatoid wrote:
|>|>| Hi, it's me AGAIN. Sigh.
|>|>|
|>|>| Everything is just great but I am getting the following
|>|>| error (not a BIG deal - all the tray icons disappear but
|>|>| everything works unless I try to start a new program -
|>|>| and it used to happen with the previous install as
|>|>| well...).
|>|>
|>|> Did you do a fresh install? Is this a full Win98SE now?
|>|
|>| I tried the full 98SE but it was just ridiculous, it took
|>| about 3 tries to get it installed. I could NOT believe it.
|>|
|>| Once it was installed, I found the shell intolerable (see
|>| reply to Evan). So I wiped C and installed 98SELite which
|>| was like spreading butter on a scone.
|>
|> If thats good enough for you, well, fine, BUT I wish you
|> posted about it first.
|
| I feel I have abused you guys enough, to be /quite/ honest.
I think we can take another sixteenth of abuse-- but no more after that!
| And I /really/ can not stand the 98 shell and Active Desktop,
| and I do not believe /both/ can be eliminated in any way but the
| Lite program or its competitor (name escapes me) or possibly one
| of 3 or (or 30) home-made solutions which have to do with the
| shell. But I have used and had NO problems with the 98SE Lite
| (Sleek, with the 95 shell, really the ONLY reason I use it!) so
| I'd rather not play guinea pig with what may be a brilliantly
| simple solution but what could also force me to follow the "Dan
| C. advice".
Few of us would have advised to use Active Desktop. I tried it once &
found it to be exceeding slow. I've read it's buggy & abuse-prone too.
It was putting WEB stuff directly onto my Desktop-- but it was very
slow! It has no ill consequence when turned off, though, that I've seen.
But fine, if Lite is what you want, I guess you may have it.
|> We could have pared down your
|> Startup Group & had you do a Scandisk/Defrag, maybe.
|
| BION, I know how to do those things
and I did them. I also
| use Start Up Changer 2000. It was one of the first things to go
| on the machine after the OS.
Yea, I thought you might. But I'm sure there is more that could have
been tried. I don't see anything horribly slow with Win98SE, but WEB
travel. But that's only slow at busy/fancy sites & because I am on
Dial-Up.
| Also, perhaps I should clarify the stupid explorer error
| happened ONLY after I installed Windows Make Up (no trace of it
| or the author on the web) and has not a happened since. Nor was
| an explorer error the reason for Lite, the damn shell and AD
| were.
I'm glad you got that solved. But what is your specific complaint with
the "damn shell?" Active Desktop need not be used-- & should not...!...
(1) Undo Active Desktop.
(a) R-Clk the Desktop, point to Active Desktop, & select Customize my
Desktop.
(b) Uncheck "View my Active Desktop as a WEB page" & Apply.
Is there anything in the box under that item? Those are WEB sites that
would appear on the Desktop. Delete them.
(c) At the Effects tab, uncheck "Hide icons when the Desktop is viewed
as a WEB page" & OK.
(d) R-Clk the Desktop, & uncheck "View as WEB page".
(2) "START, Settings, Folder Options, General tab". Set to "Classic
style". If all gets better, click "Custom...", & gingerly go back to how
you like it. But stay away from "Enable all Web related content...".
| < One
|> thing for sure to discontinue is that Task Scheduler, which
|> could have been trying to do an auto-Scandisk/Defrag among
|> other things in the background.
|
| Hey, I may be stupid, but I have been tweaking 95 and 98 for
| about 10 years! That's one of the first things to go, courtesy
| Start Up Changer.
OK. Very good. I thought so. (It took me a while, though, to finally
decide to be rid of that Tune-up Application Sart [WAlign] in there.)
|>|> Icons can disappear from the tray after Explorer is
|>|> end-tasked, for instance from the Ctlr-Alt-Del Close
|>|> Program box.
|>|
|>| WHY would I ever do that? AFAIK, it and systray HAVE to be
|>| running!
|>
|> SysTray can be eliminated by refusing to start applications
|> that use it, but most like to keep it. Explorer possibly
|> can be eliminated by changing to a different shell in
|> System.ini, [boot] section-- but you lose a good deal of
|> functionality, including the START button!
|
| I have searched and the ONLY thing that systray seems to
| actually do has to do with power mgmt which I have turned off,
| but if you C/S/D it, it's all over, IIRC.. I should look at it
| with Dependency Walker now that I have actually had some
| experience with it.
That's a worthwhile endeavor, just to see what is involved. In the end,
I guess you uncheck SystemTray in MSConfig, when you are sure nothing
will need it. I think some of the icons in the Tray may show up anyhow,
but outside the Tray. I, myself, like the Tray!
|> No, I meant to say, Explorer could have crashed on its own
|> & restarted. That would explain fewer icons in the Tray.
|
| I don't know if it restarts - I get an "invalid page fault
| message", icons disappear, sometimes nothing works except what
| was already running and the message appears every time I try to
| start anything, then sometimes I can even start new programs and
| nothing hapens except I have no visible icons in systray. But I
| /never/ thought (duuuh) of using Dep. Walker and the indication
| of "wmuhook problem" would more than explain it since WMU
| affects EVERY Windows window. And aside from the "growing pains"
| kernel32.dll error 10 minutes after dumping WMU about 24 hrs
| ago, everything has been perfect. TOO perfect in fact.
Yea. That makes sense. Looks good that was it.
|>|> Explorer immediately restarts, everything else
|>|> continues to run-- but fewer icons will appear in the
|>|> Tray. I believe the same effect can be seen after a
|>|> log-off/log-on using the START button.
|
|>| I use SSWT, a screen saver-shut off utility.
|>
|> I never Log on/off, either, but just use the default.
|
| Just checked, SSWT has "Log Off", as well as the standard
| "shutdown", "restart computer", "restart win95" (it's an old
| program - "the older the better he say, the thanatoid"), "exit
| to MS-DOS" and "help" and "cancel". I have tried "restart 95" a
| couple of times although I ALWAYS used "restart computer" and I
| see little difference although I vaguely recall there is a
| differnce. I have never "logged off" since I do not have any
| "log on" in the networks control panel. All I have is Intel 100
| and TCP/IP. Maybe I could still "log off", but why tempt the
| devil?
Right. I did it once when Chauvin was speaking of it over another
matter. He quickly rescinded it as a suggestion. My dim recollection is
it cut a few icons out of the Tray, just as End-Tasking Explorer will
do. Also, you quickly get a requestor to log back on, IIRC. There's
probably more to it-- IF a machine has multiple Users. Mine is
single-user & only the Default. In my START button, there is only... Log
Off Default. And that's the way I like it!
|>|> It's possible "Windows Make-Up" was unable to
|>|> re-establish its hook to Explorer, but that explorer
|>|> originally crashed for a different reason. What is the
|>|> last thing you did before the error happened? Anything to
|>|> do with a "file open" box?
|
| I can't remember, but pretty much anything has to do with
| opening a box of some kind and WMU hooks its claws into that
| function every time.
Yep. I'm sure you got that right.
| Since it IS an interesting program, I can post it for some of
| you if you want to look at its guts. It's tiny. Let me know.
It sounds like a lot of trouble to me.
|>|> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/275543
|>|> How to troubleshoot the "invalid page fault" error
|>|> message
|>|
|>| Read it, useless - although MANY of their articles HAVE
|>| helped me, as much as I hate to admit it.
|>
|> I was hoping you'd find some other problem among those
|> write-ups that also applied. Then, by curing it, hopefully
|> your own peculiarity would go away as well.
|
| IIRC, none indicated "invalid page fault" at any time except
| starting Windows or some *other /and/ specific* type of
| circumstance...
Alright. I didn't look through all 151 of them. I do suppose most would
be irrelevant. I'm glad you solved it on your own.
|>|> Anything in that article ring a bell? How about
|>|> these...?...
|>|>
|>|> http://support.microsoft.com/search/def ... ?mode=r&qu
|>|> er
|>|> y=EXPLORER+caused+an+invalid+page+fault+in+module+unknown&
|>|> sp id=global&catalog=LCID%3D1033&1033comm=1&res=20
|>|>
|>|> That's everything the MSKB has for "EXPLORER caused an
|>|> invalid page fault in module unknown". Do any of them
|>|> also state a symptom you've experienced?
|>|
|>| Of course not. The hell I go through is my very own,
|>| copyrighted and dongled, private computer hell, Grade A US
|>| and ISO-9666 certified.
|
| Did you notice the ISO number
?
| AFAIK they HAVE to have 4 digits...
You are a devilish one, thanatoid!
|>| But since I deleted WMU, so far so good.
|>
|> Alright. I wanted to rule that out, but fine. I see MEB
|> speaks of a way to make it work, if you want it back.
|> Hypnosis may improve his memory-- but don't make him quack
|> like a duck!
|
| Well, MY memory must be just peachy since I see I already read
| his post and I don't remember any
| "way to make it work". I'll read it again.
When he spoke of Registry entries, I presumed he was speaking of a fix.
Maybe not.
| Thanks for your time and patience.
You are welcome.
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:e3vTjl9tJHA.4364@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl:
|
|> thanatoid wrote:
|>| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
|>| news:u31WnrxtJHA.4452@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:
|>|
|>|> thanatoid wrote:
|>|>| Hi, it's me AGAIN. Sigh.
|>|>|
|>|>| Everything is just great but I am getting the following
|>|>| error (not a BIG deal - all the tray icons disappear but
|>|>| everything works unless I try to start a new program -
|>|>| and it used to happen with the previous install as
|>|>| well...).
|>|>
|>|> Did you do a fresh install? Is this a full Win98SE now?
|>|
|>| I tried the full 98SE but it was just ridiculous, it took
|>| about 3 tries to get it installed. I could NOT believe it.
|>|
|>| Once it was installed, I found the shell intolerable (see
|>| reply to Evan). So I wiped C and installed 98SELite which
|>| was like spreading butter on a scone.
|>
|> If thats good enough for you, well, fine, BUT I wish you
|> posted about it first.
|
| I feel I have abused you guys enough, to be /quite/ honest.
I think we can take another sixteenth of abuse-- but no more after that!
| And I /really/ can not stand the 98 shell and Active Desktop,
| and I do not believe /both/ can be eliminated in any way but the
| Lite program or its competitor (name escapes me) or possibly one
| of 3 or (or 30) home-made solutions which have to do with the
| shell. But I have used and had NO problems with the 98SE Lite
| (Sleek, with the 95 shell, really the ONLY reason I use it!) so
| I'd rather not play guinea pig with what may be a brilliantly
| simple solution but what could also force me to follow the "Dan
| C. advice".
Few of us would have advised to use Active Desktop. I tried it once &
found it to be exceeding slow. I've read it's buggy & abuse-prone too.
It was putting WEB stuff directly onto my Desktop-- but it was very
slow! It has no ill consequence when turned off, though, that I've seen.
But fine, if Lite is what you want, I guess you may have it.
|> We could have pared down your
|> Startup Group & had you do a Scandisk/Defrag, maybe.
|
| BION, I know how to do those things
and I did them. I also| use Start Up Changer 2000. It was one of the first things to go
| on the machine after the OS.
Yea, I thought you might. But I'm sure there is more that could have
been tried. I don't see anything horribly slow with Win98SE, but WEB
travel. But that's only slow at busy/fancy sites & because I am on
Dial-Up.
| Also, perhaps I should clarify the stupid explorer error
| happened ONLY after I installed Windows Make Up (no trace of it
| or the author on the web) and has not a happened since. Nor was
| an explorer error the reason for Lite, the damn shell and AD
| were.
I'm glad you got that solved. But what is your specific complaint with
the "damn shell?" Active Desktop need not be used-- & should not...!...
(1) Undo Active Desktop.
(a) R-Clk the Desktop, point to Active Desktop, & select Customize my
Desktop.
(b) Uncheck "View my Active Desktop as a WEB page" & Apply.
Is there anything in the box under that item? Those are WEB sites that
would appear on the Desktop. Delete them.
(c) At the Effects tab, uncheck "Hide icons when the Desktop is viewed
as a WEB page" & OK.
(d) R-Clk the Desktop, & uncheck "View as WEB page".
(2) "START, Settings, Folder Options, General tab". Set to "Classic
style". If all gets better, click "Custom...", & gingerly go back to how
you like it. But stay away from "Enable all Web related content...".
| < One
|> thing for sure to discontinue is that Task Scheduler, which
|> could have been trying to do an auto-Scandisk/Defrag among
|> other things in the background.
|
| Hey, I may be stupid, but I have been tweaking 95 and 98 for
| about 10 years! That's one of the first things to go, courtesy
| Start Up Changer.
OK. Very good. I thought so. (It took me a while, though, to finally
decide to be rid of that Tune-up Application Sart [WAlign] in there.)
|>|> Icons can disappear from the tray after Explorer is
|>|> end-tasked, for instance from the Ctlr-Alt-Del Close
|>|> Program box.
|>|
|>| WHY would I ever do that? AFAIK, it and systray HAVE to be
|>| running!
|>
|> SysTray can be eliminated by refusing to start applications
|> that use it, but most like to keep it. Explorer possibly
|> can be eliminated by changing to a different shell in
|> System.ini, [boot] section-- but you lose a good deal of
|> functionality, including the START button!
|
| I have searched and the ONLY thing that systray seems to
| actually do has to do with power mgmt which I have turned off,
| but if you C/S/D it, it's all over, IIRC.. I should look at it
| with Dependency Walker now that I have actually had some
| experience with it.
That's a worthwhile endeavor, just to see what is involved. In the end,
I guess you uncheck SystemTray in MSConfig, when you are sure nothing
will need it. I think some of the icons in the Tray may show up anyhow,
but outside the Tray. I, myself, like the Tray!
|> No, I meant to say, Explorer could have crashed on its own
|> & restarted. That would explain fewer icons in the Tray.
|
| I don't know if it restarts - I get an "invalid page fault
| message", icons disappear, sometimes nothing works except what
| was already running and the message appears every time I try to
| start anything, then sometimes I can even start new programs and
| nothing hapens except I have no visible icons in systray. But I
| /never/ thought (duuuh) of using Dep. Walker and the indication
| of "wmuhook problem" would more than explain it since WMU
| affects EVERY Windows window. And aside from the "growing pains"
| kernel32.dll error 10 minutes after dumping WMU about 24 hrs
| ago, everything has been perfect. TOO perfect in fact.
Yea. That makes sense. Looks good that was it.
|>|> Explorer immediately restarts, everything else
|>|> continues to run-- but fewer icons will appear in the
|>|> Tray. I believe the same effect can be seen after a
|>|> log-off/log-on using the START button.
|
|>| I use SSWT, a screen saver-shut off utility.
|>
|> I never Log on/off, either, but just use the default.
|
| Just checked, SSWT has "Log Off", as well as the standard
| "shutdown", "restart computer", "restart win95" (it's an old
| program - "the older the better he say, the thanatoid"), "exit
| to MS-DOS" and "help" and "cancel". I have tried "restart 95" a
| couple of times although I ALWAYS used "restart computer" and I
| see little difference although I vaguely recall there is a
| differnce. I have never "logged off" since I do not have any
| "log on" in the networks control panel. All I have is Intel 100
| and TCP/IP. Maybe I could still "log off", but why tempt the
| devil?
Right. I did it once when Chauvin was speaking of it over another
matter. He quickly rescinded it as a suggestion. My dim recollection is
it cut a few icons out of the Tray, just as End-Tasking Explorer will
do. Also, you quickly get a requestor to log back on, IIRC. There's
probably more to it-- IF a machine has multiple Users. Mine is
single-user & only the Default. In my START button, there is only... Log
Off Default. And that's the way I like it!
|>|> It's possible "Windows Make-Up" was unable to
|>|> re-establish its hook to Explorer, but that explorer
|>|> originally crashed for a different reason. What is the
|>|> last thing you did before the error happened? Anything to
|>|> do with a "file open" box?
|
| I can't remember, but pretty much anything has to do with
| opening a box of some kind and WMU hooks its claws into that
| function every time.
Yep. I'm sure you got that right.
| Since it IS an interesting program, I can post it for some of
| you if you want to look at its guts. It's tiny. Let me know.
It sounds like a lot of trouble to me.
|>|> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/275543
|>|> How to troubleshoot the "invalid page fault" error
|>|> message
|>|
|>| Read it, useless - although MANY of their articles HAVE
|>| helped me, as much as I hate to admit it.
|>
|> I was hoping you'd find some other problem among those
|> write-ups that also applied. Then, by curing it, hopefully
|> your own peculiarity would go away as well.
|
| IIRC, none indicated "invalid page fault" at any time except
| starting Windows or some *other /and/ specific* type of
| circumstance...
Alright. I didn't look through all 151 of them. I do suppose most would
be irrelevant. I'm glad you solved it on your own.
|>|> Anything in that article ring a bell? How about
|>|> these...?...
|>|>
|>|> http://support.microsoft.com/search/def ... ?mode=r&qu
|>|> er
|>|> y=EXPLORER+caused+an+invalid+page+fault+in+module+unknown&
|>|> sp id=global&catalog=LCID%3D1033&1033comm=1&res=20
|>|>
|>|> That's everything the MSKB has for "EXPLORER caused an
|>|> invalid page fault in module unknown". Do any of them
|>|> also state a symptom you've experienced?
|>|
|>| Of course not. The hell I go through is my very own,
|>| copyrighted and dongled, private computer hell, Grade A US
|>| and ISO-9666 certified.
|
| Did you notice the ISO number
?| AFAIK they HAVE to have 4 digits...
You are a devilish one, thanatoid!
|>| But since I deleted WMU, so far so good.
|>
|> Alright. I wanted to rule that out, but fine. I see MEB
|> speaks of a way to make it work, if you want it back.
|> Hypnosis may improve his memory-- but don't make him quack
|> like a duck!
|
| Well, MY memory must be just peachy since I see I already read
| his post and I don't remember any
| "way to make it work". I'll read it again.
When he spoke of Registry entries, I presumed he was speaking of a fix.
Maybe not.
| Thanks for your time and patience.
You are welcome.
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
news:#wyJcAKuJHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
<SNIP>
> Generally, I hate doppelgander
doppelganger
> movies too! Everyone should
> stay in their own body!
Hey, the pods decided what was gonna happen!
Also, depends WHAT body... Divine (of Pink Flamingos fame)?
news:#wyJcAKuJHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
<SNIP>
> Generally, I hate doppelgander
doppelganger
> movies too! Everyone should
> stay in their own body!
Hey, the pods decided what was gonna happen!
Also, depends WHAT body... Divine (of Pink Flamingos fame)?
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
thanatoid wrote:
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:#wyJcAKuJHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
|
| <SNIP>
|
|> Generally, I hate doppelgander
|
| doppelganger
Uh-huh. And it isn't quite a body-snatcher, either. But it's close
enough to hate!
|> movies too! Everyone should
|> stay in their own body!
|
| Hey, the pods decided what was gonna happen!
|
| Also, depends WHAT body... Divine (of Pink Flamingos fame)?
Nevermind that! Everyone & everything should stay in its own body!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in
| news:#wyJcAKuJHA.1492@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
|
| <SNIP>
|
|> Generally, I hate doppelgander
|
| doppelganger
Uh-huh. And it isn't quite a body-snatcher, either. But it's close
enough to hate!
|> movies too! Everyone should
|> stay in their own body!
|
| Hey, the pods decided what was gonna happen!
|
| Also, depends WHAT body... Divine (of Pink Flamingos fame)?
Nevermind that! Everyone & everything should stay in its own body!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote:
<More stuff>
If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate out
what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and which
you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly mistaken.
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
<More stuff>
If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate out
what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and which
you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly mistaken.
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
PCR wrote:
> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my signature.
> And OE-Quotefix's help states...
>
> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
> any) of the message you reply to."
>
> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
--
dadiOH
____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my signature.
> And OE-Quotefix's help states...
>
> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
> any) of the message you reply to."
>
> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
--
dadiOH
____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
Aardvark <aardvark@youllnever.know> wrote in
news:pIbDl.458$eO4.57@newsfe09.ams2:
> On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote:
>
> <More stuff>
>
> If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to
> separate out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote
> in his post and which you're 'quoting' (for want of a
> better word) then you are sadly mistaken.
Why would you think that anyone wants you to do that? Just
reading any of my posts is painful enough.
news:pIbDl.458$eO4.57@newsfe09.ams2:
> On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote:
>
> <More stuff>
>
> If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to
> separate out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote
> in his post and which you're 'quoting' (for want of a
> better word) then you are sadly mistaken.
Why would you think that anyone wants you to do that? Just
reading any of my posts is painful enough.
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
dadiOH wrote:
| PCR wrote:
|
|> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my
|> signature. And OE-Quotefix's help states...
|>
|> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
|> any) of the message you reply to."
|>
|> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
|
| By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
All right. I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip the signature & will try it a
bit. I hope you are not upset yours is gone! I'm setting it back the
first punch in the jaw I get!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| PCR wrote:
|
|> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my
|> signature. And OE-Quotefix's help states...
|>
|> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
|> any) of the message you reply to."
|>
|> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what?
|
| By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
All right. I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip the signature & will try it a
bit. I hope you are not upset yours is gone! I'm setting it back the
first punch in the jaw I get!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
Aardvark wrote:
| On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote:
|
| <More stuff>
|
| If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate
| out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and
| which you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly
| mistaken.
I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip signatures now. That's all I can do, & YOU
& dadiOH are to blame-- if anyone should miss seeing his own!
(Truthfully, I never did like how they did pile up.)
But I can't delete the words to which I'm responding, can I?! That's
crazy!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
| On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote:
|
| <More stuff>
|
| If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate
| out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and
| which you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly
| mistaken.
I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip signatures now. That's all I can do, & YOU
& dadiOH are to blame-- if anyone should miss seeing his own!
(Truthfully, I never did like how they did pile up.)
But I can't delete the words to which I'm responding, can I?! That's
crazy!
--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net
-
beauregard t. shagnasty
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 09 Apr 2009, 23:00
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
In 24hoursupport.helpdesk, PCR wrote:
> I don't see your response to my post only this one piggy-backed on
>
> I don't see your response to my post only this one piggy-backed on
>
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:47:19 -0400, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> In 24hoursupport.helpdesk, PCR wrote:
>
>> I don't see your response to my post only this one piggy-backed on
>>
> In 24hoursupport.helpdesk, PCR wrote:
>
>> I don't see your response to my post only this one piggy-backed on
>>
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:18:16 -0400, PCR wrote:
> Aardvark wrote:
> | On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote: |
> | <More stuff>
> |
> | If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate |
> out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and |
> which you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly |
> mistaken.
>
> I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip signatures now. That's all I can do, & YOU
> & dadiOH are to blame--
We're to blame for what? For continually using the wrong character at the
beginning of the lines sections of previous posts that you're 'quoting'.
No,you're to blame for that and it's time you fixed it.
Your posts are difficult to read because of it.
> if anyone should miss seeing his own!
> (Truthfully, I never did like how they did pile up.)
>
> But I can't delete the words to which I'm responding, can I?! That's
> crazy!
I'm not asking you to.
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
> Aardvark wrote:
> | On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:20:01 -0400, PCR wrote: |
> | <More stuff>
> |
> | If you think I'm going to wade through that lot and try to separate |
> out what you've written from what thanatoid wrote in his post and |
> which you're 'quoting' (for want of a better word) then you are sadly |
> mistaken.
>
> I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip signatures now. That's all I can do, & YOU
> & dadiOH are to blame--
We're to blame for what? For continually using the wrong character at the
beginning of the lines sections of previous posts that you're 'quoting'.
No,you're to blame for that and it's time you fixed it.
Your posts are difficult to read because of it.
> if anyone should miss seeing his own!
> (Truthfully, I never did like how they did pile up.)
>
> But I can't delete the words to which I'm responding, can I?! That's
> crazy!
I'm not asking you to.
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
Re: explorer "invalid page fault"
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:11:09 -0400, PCR wrote:
> dadiOH wrote:
> | PCR wrote:
> |
> |> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my |>
> signature. And OE-Quotefix's help states... |>
> |> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
> |> any) of the message you reply to." |>
> |> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what? |
> | By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
>
> All right. I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip the signature & will try it a
> bit. I hope you are not upset yours is gone! I'm setting it back the
> first punch in the jaw I get!
Hey, look below! My signature's still there!!!!
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>
> dadiOH wrote:
> | PCR wrote:
> |
> |> I'm using OE6 & OE-Quotefix. OE has an option not to add my |>
> signature. And OE-Quotefix's help states... |>
> |> "Strip quoted signature: If selected, will strip the signature (if
> |> any) of the message you reply to." |>
> |> But why would I want to do it? How will I tell who is posting what? |
> | By the "So-and-so wrote;" up at the top?
>
> All right. I've set OE-QuoteFix to strip the signature & will try it a
> bit. I hope you are not upset yours is gone! I'm setting it back the
> first punch in the jaw I get!
Hey, look below! My signature's still there!!!!
--
The month of March in this year of 2009 sees the centenary of the laying
of the keel of the most famous (or infamous) ocean liner of all time, RMS
Titanic, at Harland & Wolff shipyard in Belfast.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic>