message unavailable

actually I have all of the above and still isn't great... Honestly, my dell
p3 866/40G/512M/16m video is almost as fast. my new HP is at bare bones,
nothing installed after new, my dell is maxed out with games, music... and
still seems slightly, and I mean slightly slower than my dual-core
1.8/160GB/2G ram/335M video. the graphics seemed much better on my Dell with
the exception of the hardware screen quality (my HP has an amazing screen
but some windows such as the one I'm typing in on Windows Mail) is much
better.

I think I would be much happier with this new laptop running XP pro. once I
finish downloading the HUGE!!! amount of updates from windows and HP, if
things don't improve.... XP goes back on and my Vista disk becomes my beer
coaster.

--

HP Pavilion V9000 Entertainment Laptop
Vista Home Premium/dual core 1.8/160GB/2GB ram/335MB Graphic/17" widescreen
.... and a whole wack of bells and whistles SWEET!!
"Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:13c3kidr7b6fj8d@corp.supernews.com...

Quote:

Speed improvements under Vista: 1. Install 2 gig of memory if your not there already. 2. Install a larger, faster 7,200 rpm harddrive. 3. Clean out the buffers, and temp files. 4. and last but not least; Defrag the hard drive. That's about all you can do that is cost effective on an existing PC. Richard.

Just to see how your system speeds up,

Hi, nLinked,

Try setting your Windows drive 16 min & 16 max,
hit Set
Set your Page file on the second hard drive to System Managed,
hit Set.
5 GB is not too large for Vista in the paging file and I doubt if you will
ever see a slow down,
The min-max setting on the Windows drive is there, only for error reporting.

--
Jerry

One thing money can't buy,
The Wagging Tail of a Dog.

"nLinked" <nLinked@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6FD08D71-3F4A-4D92-A810-ED64E82A41EB@microsoft.com...

Quote:

I have 2 GB of RAM on Vista and have 2 HDDs. Vista says it recommends 4591 GB for the Page File in the Properties sheet. So I set this size on a ~5 GB partition at the beginning of the second HDD and set the Page File to 4591 GB on that drive. On the Windows drive, I set it as 200 MB. Is this good? It sounds like too much as Vista is probably just multiplying my RAM amount by 1.5 or something. Is it good to have it the way I have. Is 200 MB too much for the Windows drive? Is a 4 GB Page File going to slow things down should my RAM ever fill up by increased HDD activity?

This could explane my problems i'm having. (Thanks)

Could it be that the old PSU had damaged somthing (vidio card, hard drive,)?
I better get my hands on a meter to see if the new PSU is even working right.


I can't see it being undersized since the new one is 550w ATX. (the old one
was 500w)Or did I even hook it up right?
The new one has one 20 pin and two 4 pin connecters for the motherboard.
but I only room for one of the 4 pins. One has two yellow and two black
wires (this is the one I hooked up) and the second 4 pin has Red, black,
ornage and yellow.

Now the motherboard manual says that the 4pin should be two +12v and two
ground.

Is there a way to test the max load with out a meter?



"w_tom" wrote:

Quote:

On Aug 14, 10:34 am, K8 notsogrand K8notsogr...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: I'm not trying to be rude or anything. But your saying even if the computer is up and working fine. I can still have a bad PSU Yes. For example, a power supply can have failing electrolytic capacitors. Therefore its ripple voltage is excessive and its voltage regulation is poor. The computer will work just fine except when load is maximum AND will fail months later as the electrolytics fail. The power supply is already defective. Computer still boots OK. Meter can identify that failure during the max load (multitasking) test - especially when the failure only creates a rare computer crash. Another defective power supply works just fine in another computer but will not work in this one. It may be undersized - but just large enough to run that other computer. Its signaling voltages may be defective, just enough to be seen OK by another computer, but not properly read by this computer's power supply controller. Two example of how a power supply can work and yet still be defective. In the second example, one would blame the power supply controller rather than a defective power supply. Also an example of why shotgunning can lead to total confusion.

Right. The Start Menu search I think searches just "Documents" for the
current user {c:\users\<username>} by default. The Search explorer searches
all indexed location by default. So I think that would explain why something
in Documents would appear in the start menu, but something on some other
folder on another drive would not. Is that not the behavior you are seeing?

"Beowulf Agat" <BeowulfAgat@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3512C38A-0820-4D45-9AE8-CFDD1F390E87@microsoft.com...

Quote:

Thanks for help and suggestions. Make sure you take "ownership" of the files (security tab in properties for the drive or folder). I am owner of the files. "The Start Menu search doesn't search for exactly the same things as the full Search window." But on my other computer where all files are in the "my docs" folder my files pop up directly. Any more suggestions? Also, is there a way to change the priority of the serach results in the start menu search so that files are always listed before outlook messages? "Kurt Herman" wrote: Index search will only return files that the current user "owns". Wouldn't be very secure if it did. :) Kurt "Beowulf Agat" <Beowulf Agat@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:78BDA532-C21B-4F14-8D79-D82700EC1306@microsoft.com... I have Vista ultimate on a laptop with 2 hard drives. I keep all my user files on D:, which is indexed. When I search for a file that I know is there it doesn't show up in the search results. I have tried moving the entire index to D: and I have tried rebuilding the index several times without any improvement. Why won't the index search through D:?

I have the same problem, had all my hardware tested and its fine. Then
again, I was super unhappy to learn I had no choice but to go with vista for
my computer...

Try updating video drivers.

The same thing was happening when I bought a nVidia "made for Vista" video
card.
Stopped when I got new drivers.



"B" <B@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6CAACBEC-1FF9-4107-A6AD-5D0FAAC87461@microsoft.com...

Quote:

Various 3d games are crashing on me would directx be the problem? I've got a laptop that is: Vista Home Premium 32bit (6.0, Build 6000) Intel Core 2 at 1.73GHz 2GB RAM Mobile Intel(R) 945GM/GU Express Chipset Family (Intel GMA 950) When i go under DXdiag it says i'm running directx 10 (which i think intel doesn't support yet) My specs are well above the requirements for the games but some have low framerates or just all of a sudden crash and close without any dialog indicating an error (while nothing else other than that game crashes).

Try updating video drivers.

The same thing was happening when I bought a nVidia "made for Vista" video
card.
Stopped when I got new drivers.



"B" <B@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:6CAACBEC-1FF9-4107-A6AD-5D0FAAC87461@microsoft.com...

Quote:

Various 3d games are crashing on me would directx be the problem? I've got a laptop that is: Vista Home Premium 32bit (6.0, Build 6000) Intel Core 2 at 1.73GHz 2GB RAM Mobile Intel(R) 945GM/GU Express Chipset Family (Intel GMA 950) When i go under DXdiag it says i'm running directx 10 (which i think intel doesn't support yet) My specs are well above the requirements for the games but some have low framerates or just all of a sudden crash and close without any dialog indicating an error (while nothing else other than that game crashes).

"Grillpimpmaster" <Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message
news:Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net...

Quote:

Hi I'm Grillpimpmaster, after I've installed Vista the harddisk runs permanetely! Many of my friends have the same problem! To make the harddisk silent to the following steps: - type msconfig in the command line ::*- Disable SUPERFETCH - Right click on the hardisk \"INDEXING\" disable it and adding \"for subfolder\" - Disable \"Windows Search\"*:: For Enthusiasts: - Disable "System Restoring" After a reboot you've got a silent system and now you can drink a cup of coffee with no disturbing harddrive!:cool: I'm from Germany, so If you have time correct my english!

Does it increase data tranfer speed?

Quote:

______________________________________________________________ I've got a answer for the question "NOT TO BE ABLE TO RENAME FOLDERS" After installing the inoffical patch KB938_*979*__x64 and reboot YOU can't rename any folders! ONLY a System Restore point helps to undo it! -- Grillpimpmaster

Quote:

Does it increase data tranfer speed?

No, all those process are low priority, but it does:

- Remove the ability to restore the system to a prior state if something
goes wrong
- Slow data retrieval as nothing is indexed, so the search engine has to
scan manually from a to z
- Slow loading of programs and data frequently used as they are no longer
preloaded when you disable superfetch

It is normal for a new system to run constantly for a few days while Vista
catalogs the data and learn user habits. Everything Grillpimpmaster lists
has the net effect of either slowing down the normal response time by
restricting design functionality or removing the user's ability to recover
from damage.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

"GeekBoy" <geek@boy.com> wrote in message
news:46c3f077$1$16453$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

Quote:

"Grillpimpmaster" <Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message news:Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net... Hi I'm Grillpimpmaster, after I've installed Vista the harddisk runs permanetely! Many of my friends have the same problem! To make the harddisk silent to the following steps: - type msconfig in the command line ::*- Disable SUPERFETCH - Right click on the hardisk \"INDEXING\" disable it and adding \"for subfolder\" - Disable \"Windows Search\"*:: For Enthusiasts: - Disable "System Restoring" After a reboot you've got a silent system and now you can drink a cup of coffee with no disturbing harddrive!:cool: I'm from Germany, so If you have time correct my english! ______________________________________________________________ I've got a answer for the question "NOT TO BE ABLE TO RENAME FOLDERS" After installing the inoffical patch KB938_*979*__x64 and reboot YOU can't rename any folders! ONLY a System Restore point helps to undo it! -- Grillpimpmaster

"SuprTnkr" <SuprTnkr@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht
news:BBED747E-0656-4DB9-9E18-1985B282D05E@microsoft.com...

Quote:

I defraged my computer but when i go to www.pcpitstop.com it tells me that my C drive is 13% fragmented. No matter how many times i do it, the best i can get is 11%. Any ideas?

Hi everybody,
From nature i am against using third party SW.
The question is here more...if Vista tells that there is no need for
defragmentation is this true?

I agree that there is no logic within it:
-no view about the progress as in previous versions
-after performing the defragmentation (very long time, even if there are no
other activities) and starting it immediately again theere is the same
sympton.

It is my believe that this should be clarified first by the experts and once
that is know i will may be use third parts SW.

Regards
Huib

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Rogers" <rick@mvps.org>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance_maintenance
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 5:17 AM
Subject: Re: Pimping to make harddisk silent !

Quote:

Does it increase data tranfer speed? No, all those process are low priority, but it does: - Remove the ability to restore the system to a prior state if something goes wrong - Slow data retrieval as nothing is indexed, so the search engine has to scan manually from a to z - Slow loading of programs and data frequently used as they are no longer preloaded when you disable superfetch It is normal for a new system to run constantly for a few days while Vista catalogs the data and learn user habits. Everything Grillpimpmaster lists has the net effect of either slowing down the normal response time by restricting design functionality or removing the user's ability to recover from damage.

Well that is not good. Seems like it takes forver to load anything on my
system.
hence my questioning on such matters.

Quote:

-- Best of Luck, Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ Windows help - www.rickrogers.org My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com "GeekBoy" <geek@boy.com> wrote in message news:46c3f077$1$16453$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... "Grillpimpmaster" <Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message news:Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net... Hi I'm Grillpimpmaster, after I've installed Vista the harddisk runs permanetely! Many of my friends have the same problem! To make the harddisk silent to the following steps: - type msconfig in the command line ::*- Disable SUPERFETCH - Right click on the hardisk \"INDEXING\" disable it and adding \"for subfolder\" - Disable \"Windows Search\"*:: For Enthusiasts: - Disable "System Restoring" After a reboot you've got a silent system and now you can drink a cup of coffee with no disturbing harddrive!:cool: I'm from Germany, so If you have time correct my english! ______________________________________________________________ I've got a answer for the question "NOT TO BE ABLE TO RENAME FOLDERS" After installing the inoffical patch KB938_*979*__x64 and reboot YOU can't rename any folders! ONLY a System Restore point helps to undo it! -- Grillpimpmaster

If a power supply creates damage to any computer part, then another
function was missing inside that power supply. To damage a video card
or hard drive, then voltage must be excessive. But even power
supplies 30 years ago contained separate circuits so that overvoltage
would not happen. It is required in all supplies today. However, with
so many A+ Certified computer techs having no electrical knowledge,
the market is chock full of power supplies missing essential functions
and selling only on watts and price. To dump supplies missing
essential functions, a supply manufacturer need only forget to provide
that long list of numeric specs. What did your supply manufacturer
do?

Take the 500 watt number. That could be a 350 watt supply measured
differently. They did not lie. They only (intentionally?) deceived.
Again, they can do what in a market where computer assemblers have
little electrical knowledge - don't even know how to read spec
numbers. Then a supply may not even do 350 watts. Put the computer
into maximum power consumption mode (multitask to all peripherals) and
take voltages on orange, red, yellow, and purple wires. If power
supply is sufficient, then voltages will remain above 3.23, 4.87, and
11.7 volts. Best way to confirm size of a supply - measure it under
full load.

No conductor has same electricity at both ends. CPUs can go from
consuming less than 1 amp to demanding tens of amps - in only
microseconds. Therefore PC traces through motherboard are too long.
We put 12 volts at the CPU with that 4 (black and yellow) wire next to
CPU's power supply. To provide sufficient power fast enough, a CPU
has a power supply adjacent and a dedicated 12 volt power source.
That four wire connector would connect somewhere next to CPU.

We test power supplies even better outside the computer. That is
hundreds of dollars in test equipment with dynamic loads, cooling for
those loads, and measurements even for response times. We also use an
oscilloscope. Either you do that, or you do something hundreds of
times less expensive. Using the meter is the only useful test you
have without major expenses. It must be 3.5 digits because an analog
meter is not sufficiently accurate. If your motherboard has a voltage
monitor, then the meter is necessary to calibrate that monitor.

On Aug 15, 1:46 pm, K8 notsogrand
<K8notsogr...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

Quote:

This could explane my problems i'm having. (Thanks) Could it be that the old PSU had damaged somthing (vidio card, hard drive,)? I better get my hands on a meter to see if the new PSU is even working right. I can't see it being undersized since the new one is 550w ATX. (the old one was 500w)Or did I even hook it up right? The new one has one 20 pin and two 4 pin connecters for the motherboard. but I only room for one of the 4 pins. One has two yellow and two black wires (this is the one I hooked up) and the second 4 pin has Red, black, ornage and yellow. Now the motherboard manual says that the 4pin should be two +12v and two ground. Is there a way to test the max load with out a meter?

Actually for a power supply to cause problems the voltage can be
low or not clean enough of a wave length (tough generally computers
are fairly forgiving of either of these issues). High voltage or a high
forced amperage can also cause issues, especially spikes.

"w_tom" <w_tom1@usa.net> wrote in message news:1187287730.604173.204080@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...

Quote:

If a power supply creates damage to any computer part, then another function was missing inside that power supply. To damage a video card or hard drive, then voltage must be excessive. But even power supplies 30 years ago contained separate circuits so that overvoltage would not happen. It is required in all supplies today. However, with so many A+ Certified computer techs having no electrical knowledge, the market is chock full of power supplies missing essential functions and selling only on watts and price. To dump supplies missing essential functions, a supply manufacturer need only forget to provide that long list of numeric specs. What did your supply manufacturer do? Take the 500 watt number. That could be a 350 watt supply measured differently. They did not lie. They only (intentionally?) deceived. Again, they can do what in a market where computer assemblers have little electrical knowledge - don't even know how to read spec numbers. Then a supply may not even do 350 watts. Put the computer into maximum power consumption mode (multitask to all peripherals) and take voltages on orange, red, yellow, and purple wires. If power supply is sufficient, then voltages will remain above 3.23, 4.87, and 11.7 volts. Best way to confirm size of a supply - measure it under full load. No conductor has same electricity at both ends. CPUs can go from consuming less than 1 amp to demanding tens of amps - in only microseconds. Therefore PC traces through motherboard are too long. We put 12 volts at the CPU with that 4 (black and yellow) wire next to CPU's power supply. To provide sufficient power fast enough, a CPU has a power supply adjacent and a dedicated 12 volt power source. That four wire connector would connect somewhere next to CPU. We test power supplies even better outside the computer. That is hundreds of dollars in test equipment with dynamic loads, cooling for those loads, and measurements even for response times. We also use an oscilloscope. Either you do that, or you do something hundreds of times less expensive. Using the meter is the only useful test you have without major expenses. It must be 3.5 digits because an analog meter is not sufficiently accurate. If your motherboard has a voltage monitor, then the meter is necessary to calibrate that monitor. On Aug 15, 1:46 pm, K8 notsogrand K8notsogr...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote: This could explane my problems i'm having. (Thanks) Could it be that the old PSU had damaged somthing (vidio card, hard drive,)? I better get my hands on a meter to see if the new PSU is even working right. I can't see it being undersized since the new one is 550w ATX. (the old one was 500w)Or did I even hook it up right? The new one has one 20 pin and two 4 pin connecters for the motherboard. but I only room for one of the 4 pins. One has two yellow and two black wires (this is the one I hooked up) and the second 4 pin has Red, black, ornage and yellow. Now the motherboard manual says that the 4pin should be two +12v and two ground. Is there a way to test the max load with out a meter?

Start a new thread with a good description of your issue.

Be sure to update all drivers especially Video and Hard Disk
including any hard disk utilities. These are notorious for causing
delays and hang-ups including slow disk assess.

"GeekBoy" <geek@boy.com> wrote in message news:46c48d2c$0$4071$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

Quote:

----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Rogers" <rick@mvps.org Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance_maintenance Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 5:17 AM Subject: Re: Pimping to make harddisk silent ! Does it increase data tranfer speed? No, all those process are low priority, but it does: - Remove the ability to restore the system to a prior state if something goes wrong - Slow data retrieval as nothing is indexed, so the search engine has to scan manually from a to z - Slow loading of programs and data frequently used as they are no longer preloaded when you disable superfetch It is normal for a new system to run constantly for a few days while Vista catalogs the data and learn user habits. Everything Grillpimpmaster lists has the net effect of either slowing down the normal response time by restricting design functionality or removing the user's ability to recover from damage. Well that is not good. Seems like it takes forver to load anything on my system. hence my questioning on such matters. -- Best of Luck, Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ Windows help - www.rickrogers.org My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com "GeekBoy" <geek@boy.com> wrote in message news:46c3f077$1$16453$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... "Grillpimpmaster" <Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net> wrote in message news:Grillpimpmaster.2v2bv1@no-mx.forums.net... Hi I'm Grillpimpmaster, after I've installed Vista the harddisk runs permanetely! Many of my friends have the same problem! To make the harddisk silent to the following steps: - type msconfig in the command line ::*- Disable SUPERFETCH - Right click on the hardisk \"INDEXING\" disable it and adding \"for subfolder\" - Disable \"Windows Search\"*:: For Enthusiasts: - Disable "System Restoring" After a reboot you've got a silent system and now you can drink a cup of coffee with no disturbing harddrive!:cool: I'm from Germany, so If you have time correct my english! ______________________________________________________________ I've got a answer for the question "NOT TO BE ABLE TO RENAME FOLDERS" After installing the inoffical patch KB938_*979*__x64 and reboot YOU can't rename any folders! ONLY a System Restore point helps to undo it! -- Grillpimpmaster

I know that it has been awhile since the last post here, but I have been
searching for a solution to this problem for a long time and I believe I
have found a solution. My computers are on a domain with Active
directory. When they are not in a managed group, the log on is quick.
When the machines are put into a managed group, it takes 599 seconds to
load (10 minutes) the desktop. When I read the last post here regarding
DNS, it prompted me to start looking at this, and this is where I saw
the IPV6 checkbox. My DNS settings are automatically provided for me,
but I added them anyway. BUT I also removed the checkbox for IPV6 (Since
I'm using DHCP with IPV4) and then restarted the computer. The computer
is now in the managed group in active directory and it's logging in
quickly.
My reason for posting this is because I have not been able to find any
documentation on this particular problem and I hope this will help
someone else.
Since I started writing this post, I thought I would narrow it down
some more. I removed the DNS settings and now they're set to
automatically obtain, logged off and back on. It logged on instantly. So
I'm fairly certian that it is the IPV6 checkbox causing this.


--
acannon

You may have a memory issue with that large memory video card. Microsoft has
posted a supported fix for this that it is reported will become part of SP1.
The fix is not yet part of any automatic download. Don't worry about it
unless you intend to run some video games that are hogs for memory and
memory resources.

Richard.

Got the same problems. At first it worked fine but after a while I got the
same problems as described in this post.

Solution for opening connections:
Goto "Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network Connections"
and make a shortcut to your desktop. The perfomance for VPN connections is
stil bad, but you have a quick list of connections

"Alvin Lau" wrote:

Quote:

Hi there, I just got my new laptop for work last week, which is T7200 with 2GB ram and Vista Business. During this week, i found out there have few problems with the vista. 1. I always need to VPN to difference client's network, when i click on "connect to" its took minimum 1 mins to load up. which is less than 5 sec in XP to open network connections. 2. When i click on VPN, even i am connected to the internet, it still said "this connection require a internet access" and not allow me to connect...wierd 3. Sometimes when i click on IE, its dont even pop up, so i need to go to Task manager and end IE that process (i think this is a bugs) This is the problems that i can find from this stage. ps. Compare the XP, the "connect to" methods is not ease of use anymore. Under XP i can just start - Network conection and all the VPN connections will be show up as link then i just click and connect. But now, i need to right click on the LAN icons and select "Connect to the netwok"...and wait ...and wait for it pop up ....and search the VPN connection in a Large icon view...sigh ---------------- This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then click "I Agree" in the message pane. http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.mspx?mid=aff2305b-5166-4a19-80ca-9babbe6e906e&dg=microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance_maintenance

I got this fix from Microsoft support. It works, I did it. I did tell them
that the problem seems to be Microsofts because there are too many of us
experiencing the same problem.

To troubleshoot this issue, I suggest we first perform these steps:

Step 1: Download Microsoft Windows Installer CleanUp utility
====================================
1. Visit:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/9/D/E9D80355-7AB4-45B8-80E8-983A48D5E1BD/msicuu2.exe
2. Save the file to your computer.
3. Right click "msicuu2.exe", click "Run as administrator" and follow the
wizard to install this tool on your computer.

Step 2: Remove .NET Framework
========================
1. Click Start ->All Programs->Windows Installer Clean Up, click Allow.
2. See if you can find .Net Framework software. If so, remove them.

After that, please restart the computer and perform the following
suggestions to reinstall .NET framework 1.1 and the updates for it.

Step 3: Install .NET Framework 1.1 Redistributable Package and related updates
==================================================
1. Please download the Microsoft .NET Framework Version 1.1 Redistributable
Package from the following link and save it to the C drive (C:\)

1) Microsoft .NET Framework Version 1.1 Redistributable Package

http://download.microsoft.com/download/a/a/c/aac39226-8825-44ce-90e3-bf8203e74006/dotnetfx.exe

2) Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 Service Pack 1

http://download.microsoft.com/download/8/b/4/8b4addd8-e957-4dea-bdb8-c4e00af5b94b/NDP1.1sp1-KB867460-X86.exe

3) Security Update for Microsoft .NET Framework, Version 1.1 Service Pack 1
(KB928366)

http://www.download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/v3-19990518/cabpool/ndp1.1sp1-kb928366-x86_20112ef50011e0de2c0e3378139245d81a178b15.exe

4) .NET Framework 1.1 Service Pack 1 SYSTEM.WEB.DLL and MSCOREE.DLL Security
Update for Windows Vista (KB929729)

http://download.microsoft.com/download/6/c/c/6ccd11ec-a7ca-4294-92fb-60beff5502e9/NDP1.1sp1-KB929729-X86.exe




"How2" wrote:

Quote:

This error code relates to a "security update for Microsoft.NET framework version 1.1 Service Pack 1. My Windows Vista has tried many times to download this update and each time it has failed and reports error code 643. What is the solution to this problem?

I have set my user as owner of c:\windows\winsxs\pending.xml, gave modify
permission also.

Edited c:\windows\winsxs\pending.xml, cleanup all information (off course i
hade mad a backup first).

After this i have opened windows update and check for new updates.

"tmar" wrote:

Quote:

Yep I did that also, and got the same response. I then waited and no one responded, so I did went to setpoint and did that. Now I get err 80004002 and I am waiting for response on that. I wish you luck, I think we both need it. "JRTexan" wrote: I tried the suggested fix from Microsoft to go through CMD as administrator, and received yet another error message. here is a copy of the data from that page. Any suggestions anyone, I am at a loss here. C:\Windows\system32>reg delete HKLM\COMPONENTS /v StoreDirty Delete the registry value StoreDirty (Yes/No)? y ERROR: The system was unable to find the specified registry key or value. C:\Windows\system32 HELP!