How To Banish MS Java Warning?

[Cluttermagnet]

I probably should have asked about this here. My question over in another forum has gotten no replies so far- How To Remove Annoying Popup r.e. Java/MS I think it may involve simply resetting something in the IE Preferences? Or is it a registry hack? I hope someone can help. More stupid fallout over the MS/Sun Java wars and certificate woes, I guess. Can anyone help me with this?

[nlinecomputers]

Have him reinstall Java. Sounds like it is botched up.

[Cluttermagnet]

Have him reinstall Java.  Sounds like it is botched up.

Thanks, Nathan-But not a specific enough answer for me to gather your meaning. I'd have to ask- which Java do you mean? Sun Java, or the MS Java version WinXP is asking for? And most important, is there some way to simply disable the nag window? If so, this would be the preferred fix for both me and my friend.Thanks, ClutterP.S. This is a brand new problem, having started no more than a week to two ago, and he has done nothing we know of that would have caused any Java problems. We suspect this might relate to XP regarding IE as being 'damaged' (loss of full functionality) due to the expiration of a Microsoft certificate r.e. Java.

[nlinecomputers]

Sun Java. MS has nothing to do with this. The Java plug in Netscape, which can only be Sun, is the item complaining and it is the item that is confused. It's complaining when you are running Firebird/Netscape is it not?

[GolfProRM]

You need to change the User Agent switcher back to Firebird... When FB starts and the UA string is set to IE spoof, Java doesn't know that it's still Firebird.

[Cluttermagnet]

Thanks, guys-You have given me a thing or two to check. I don't remember if I installed the User Agent Switcher extension for him or not. I suspect not. BTW the popup complains that IE wants MS Java and not the Netscape Java. This seems kind of excessive and irrelevant, as we have not opened IE and it is not running when the annoying window pops up. That is why I am wondering if it is actually XP complaining on behalf of IE. After all, IE and Windows are even more tightly integrated in XP than they ever were in 98.I will suggest that he try dumping and then reinstalling Sun Java. No problem doing that.

[Cluttermagnet]

I recently got around to looking closer at my friend's P4 WinXP machine and the java situation with Firebird. He had a slightly older sun java runtime environment, something like 1.4.0_xx, so we deleted that one and installed the latest sun java, something like 1.4.2_04 or so. After that, we installed the latest Mozilla 1.6 release and also Firefox 0.8, the milestone stable release. Both of these went into c:\program files, BTW, if anyone is keeping track. Meanwhile, we kept his copies of Moz 1.3 and Firebird 0.7 which are both located on the root directory c: and were simply unzipped into folders and not 'formally' installed. There have been no detectable problems resulting from not creating a Profile at first use. I always was creating a new one whenever and wherever I installed Firebird. Started it the first time from a command line with "-p" appended to bring up the Profile wizard.Interesting results- Mozilla 1.6 simply starts up and runs. No problems, no java warning message. We still have the same darn problem with both Firebird and Firefox- when you open either, you still get the annoying nag window you have to click through. I must say, the message makes absolutely no sense to me. The warning says: "Java plugin for Netscape Navigator should not be used in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Please use java plugin for Microsoft Internet Explorer instead." This makes no sense at all*, as we do not have any instances of IE running at the time this message pops in. We do not have IE running and we are not trying to start it, either. Can anyone explain this in a way that makes it seem rational? No problem when starting Mozilla plain vanilla, and always an MSjava nag window whenever starting Firefox or Firebird. Is this a bug? Anyone ever run across another description of this zany behavior by some other users of Firebird/ Firefox? I'm kind of stumped about where to go next with this. I can tell you that this is not experienced as a relatively minor problem by my friend. He considers this a major annoyance, and this is straining his relationship with these new xml browsers.*Someone suggested going into IE and disabling java and javascript. I believe we successfully did that before, but I will have to check on that to be sure. I'm pretty sure that was done, and if so it certainly made no difference.

[Ed_P]

Have you considered installing a newer Java plug-in for IE? I seem to remember seeing two different folders for Java on my XP system, one for Netscape and one for IE. As for Sun or MS's version I don't think it matters but I'm not sure MS is distributing Java anymore so you don't have a choice. While your friend may not have IE running directly a startup that checks his weather, checks his wallpaper, his pc's clock, an antivirus update or even Windows Update itself may be accessing the 'net using IE components which in turn invoke Java.BTW Java and Javascript are totally different and unrelated inspite of similar names.

[Neil P]

Interesting results- Mozilla 1.6 simply starts up and runs. No problems, no java warning message. We still have the same darn problem with both Firebird and Firefox- when you open either, you still get the annoying nag window you have to click through. I must say, the message makes absolutely no sense to me. The warning says: "Java plugin for Netscape Navigator should not be used in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Please use java plugin for Microsoft Internet Explorer instead." This makes no sense at all*, as we do not have any instances of IE running at the time this message pops in. We do not have IE running and we are not trying to start it, either. Can anyone explain this in a way that makes it seem rational? No problem when starting Mozilla plain vanilla, and always an MSjava nag window whenever starting Firefox or Firebird. Is this a bug? Anyone ever run across another description of this zany behavior by some other users of Firebird/ Firefox? I'm kind of stumped about where to go next with this. I can tell you that this is not experienced as a relatively minor problem by my friend. He considers this a major annoyance, and this is straining his relationship with these new xml browsers.

Are you sure that you aren't spoofing the UA? As Ryan suggested, that is exactly the message you would get with Sun's Java VM when you open what is acting like IE.

[eksimba]

I agree with some of the previous posters... It seems that as the Java plugin for Netscape is starting up, it thinks it's being invoked by IE (which it isn't) and complains. Something is making the plugin think it's running in IE, and the most likely cause is that Firefox is identifying itself as IE.

[Cluttermagnet]

OK, guys-Thanks for the suggestion. I'm not sure if Firebird/ Firefox is spoofing IE or not. I will have to check both, and that will eventually get done, though probably no sooner than next weekend. Your logic does make perfect sense. I may have installed the User Agent Switcher extension for him in Firefox. I sure don't remember setting it to spoof IE at any time, however- but perhaps he got in there when I wasn't around and messed with that setting, not knowing what he was doing. Problem is that we get this same troublesome behavior out of Firefox and I'm talking right 'out of the box' in that case. I didn't even know that User Agent Switcher comes stock with Firefox, if that is the case. So we certainly did not set Firefox to spoof IE, that much I am absolutely positive about, so much so that I would be willing to wager large amounts of money on it (and BTW I am a lousy gambler and never bet!) We're talking "complete metaphysical certainty" here, as John McGlocklin (check my spelling) is so fond of saying on his weekly political talk show. So we would have to be assuming that Firefox comes optioned 'out of the box' to spoof IE. I kind of doubt that! I wish your suggestion were the right one, but I have a strong hunch that it is not, at this point. I wonder if there is any wierd setting in either his XP Home edition or in the java console? I remember poking around in there and I'm pretty sure IE is unchecked for java support. Again, that is something I will have to confirm during my next visit.Looking back, I'm happy to note that although he has complained about this irksome little problem, he nonetheless continued to click through the offending window and to use Firebird for all his online browsing. Thankfully, he did listen to my dire warnings about IE and security, and has refrained from using IE very much if at all.Just to remind, he has had his computer for about a year, and had Firebird installed by me several months ago- yet the problem did not first crop up until fairly recently, like, say, a month ago. He definitely used Firebird for months before this problem suddenly appeared. Let me also remind that the problem suddenly appeared right around the time a court case went against Microsoft who was being sued by Sun, and there was a lot of talk about MS recommending everyone going and geting MSjava. Also at that time, there was a lot of talk about revoked or expiring certificate(s) affecting Microsoft software (or was that Symantec?) Gee, it is hard to keep track of all the intrigue.

[Neil P]

I recently got around to looking closer at my friend's P4 WinXP machine and the java situation with Firebird. He had a slightly older sun java runtime environment, something like 1.4.0_xx, so we deleted that one and installed the latest sun java, something like 1.4.2_04 or so. After that, we installed the latest Mozilla 1.6 release and also Firefox 0.8, the milestone stable release. Both of these went into c:\program files, BTW, if anyone is keeping track. Meanwhile, we kept his copies of Moz 1.3 and Firebird 0.7 which are both located on the root directory c: and were simply unzipped into folders and not 'formally' installed. There have been no detectable problems resulting from not creating a Profile at first use. I always was creating a new one whenever and wherever I installed Firebird. Started it the first time from a command line with "-p" appended to bring up the Profile wizard.

So have you created a new profile with the new 0.8 release? I'm not sure from your post.Check the Plugindoc at mozdev which has a little more information.Basically, it says to use the JRE 1.4.2_04 (that Sun has to install via XPI, which is very convenient) So, try a new profile and then install the XPI above, and see if that works. Also, be sure to get these registry entries if you are using zip build only, I believe the installer does this already. Hope some of that helps

[Cluttermagnet]

Hmmmmm-Well, now things are starting to get interesting, judging by your comments. Although I was aware of all the warnings about creating a new profile for 0.8, it so happens I did not do that. Seems like in the heat of battle, when the browser was finished installing itself if asked if I wanted to start the program. I thought "gee, that's interesting, what about profiles", but I allowed it to open right after the install. Everything seemed to work fine, other than the stupid MSjava warning window. It did find our profile for 0.7 I gather, as all the 0.7 bookmarks were visible in the newly installed 0.8.Second point- you mention installing the latest sun java via XPI. I am pretty sure I did not do it that way. Whenever I am presented with two choices of how to download and install a program, I instinctively always go for the one that gives me, the user, the most control. Therefore, I went for the offline option (I think they call it) where you download an exe. After dumping the older sun java I installed the latest by clicking on a desktop link I set up to the freshly downloaded exe before shutting down all running programs not needed and doing the install. So now it is sounding like I should have permitted the online download and install method, apparently?BTW the 0.8 version I installed was not the zipped version, it was the milestone stable 0.8 release with the installer- it is the self-installing version.

[Neil P]

Hmmmmm-Well, now things are starting to get interesting, judging by your comments. Although I was aware of all the warnings about creating a new profile for 0.8, it so happens I did not do that. Seems like in the heat of battle, when the browser was finished installing itself if asked if I wanted to start the program. I thought "gee, that's interesting, what about profiles", but I allowed it to open right after the install. Everything seemed to work fine, other than the stupid MSjava warning window. It did find our profile for 0.7 I gather, as all the 0.7 bookmarks were visible in the newly installed 0.8.Second point- you mention installing the latest sun java via XPI. I am pretty sure I did not do it that way. Whenever I am presented with two choices of how to download and install a program, I instinctively always go for the one that gives me, the user, the most control. Therefore, I went for the offline option (I think they call it) where you download an exe. After dumping the older sun java I installed the latest by clicking on a desktop link I set up to the freshly downloaded exe before shutting down all running programs not needed and doing the install. So now it is sounding like I should have permitted the online download and install method, apparently?BTW the 0.8 version I installed was not the zipped version, it was the milestone stable 0.8 release with the installer- it is the self-installing version.

The XPI version of it is supposed to be very convenient. And I'm sure it is. So basically I am suggesting a new profile and the XPI version of Java (I still am not sure if deleting the Java VM is necessary--you may be able to leave it where it is) should fix your problem.Hope you can get it working, I am interested in seeing the resolution to this.

[Cluttermagnet]

The XPI version of it is supposed to be very convenient. And I'm sure it is. So basically I am suggesting a new profile and the XPI version of Java (I still am not sure if deleting the Java VM is necessary--you may be able to leave it where it is) should fix your problem.Hope you can get it working, I am interested in seeing the resolution to this. 

Thanks, Steeler Fan-I will very likely be back over there next weekend, and I will try all your suggestions. In particular, the Profile (a new one) for 0.8 sounds like a very good idea. I assume I can start our already- installed 0.8 from a command line with "-p" appended and still get the Profile wizard to come up and do its thing? Meanwhile, if a bunch of installing/ uninstalling of 0.8 and working on the profile does not fix the problem, I will also try stripping out everything including the latest sun java and reinstall in XPI style, then reinstall 0.8. Maybe I will eventually hit on the right combination or sequence to get 0.8 and sun java really talking to each other without the stupid MSjava warning window. I'm a little fuzzy as to which is supposed to be a part of the 'magic sequence'- do you install java by XPI first, or do you install 0.8 and then java by XPI. I'm so confused, and it's not even April yet.

[Neil P]

Thanks, Steeler Fan-I will very likely be back over there next weekend, and I will try all your suggestions. In particular, the Profile (a new one) for 0.8 sounds like a very good idea. I assume I can start our already- installed 0.8 from a command line with "-p" appended and still get the Profile wizard to come up and do its thing? Meanwhile, if a bunch of installing/ uninstalling of 0.8 and working on the profile does not fix the problem, I will also try stripping out everything including the latest sun java and reinstall in XPI style, then reinstall 0.8. Maybe I will eventually hit on the right combination or sequence to get 0.8 and sun java really talking to each other without the stupid MSjava warning window. I'm a little fuzzy as to which is supposed to be a part of the 'magic sequence'- do you install java by XPI first, or do you install 0.8 and then java by XPI. I'm so confused, and it's not even April yet.   

1) Yes, you certainly can launch the profile manager (anytime) by using the -p switch.2) Here is the order I would recommend:First, uninstall Firefox (I don't know if the installer does this? I don't use it).Second, re-install it (make sure it is an empty directory).Third, create a new profile (using the -p switch)Finally, Install the Java XPI (Firefox needs to be installed for that to work. It (afaik) is a Mozilla technology.ORYou could first try just installing the Java XPI in the current profile and see if it works, it may save you all the install/uninstall trouble. To make it easy (I don't know if he is on dialup or not), just save it to the desktop, and I am pretty sure you can open a Firefox window and just drag the xpi in there which should bring up the XPInstall.Hope that will help you,Neil

[Cluttermagnet]

Thanks again for all the help, guys. Neil, you were right about the profile, it seems. On Saturday I returned to do battle and I had the problem fixed inside of 5-10 minutes this time. What happened and in what order would probably get so convoluted that I will not try to give a complete, blow by blow description of what happened.I would start out by saying, however, that why the problem first manifested is still as mysterious as ever. Some time long after I had Firebird 0.7 installed and working on his machine, he started getting the MSjava warning windows, and it seems that there is absolutely nothing he remembers doing that should have caused this. It affected Firebird only- it did not happen when IE or Mozilla 1.3 or Kmeleon 0.7 SP1 were opened, only with Firebird.Later, I added Mozilla 1.6 and Firefox 0.8. Same as before except that now the MSjava warning popped in for both 0.7 and 0.8.The cure definitely was a result of looking into the Profiles issue, and specifically, into making a new one for 0.8, because I was talked out of doing that at the end of the install for some reason. It invited me to 'just launch it' with a mouse click, and I threw caution to the winds and did just that.The cause started to look pretty clear when I poked around and realized that 0.8 was sharing a profile with 0.7. I knew, of course, that this is a no-no. An interesting development is that 0.7 did have User Agent Switcher installed. I could see it looking at Tools/Options in 0.8. And guess what? Something had set the User Agent to spoof IE6. Neither he nor I remember changing that setting, but there it was.I went on to have a heck of a lot of trouble trying to get frickin' XP to open from a command line (Start/Run). It kept lying to me and trying to convince me that no such file existed anywhere on C: drive. I knew darned well that it did, but no nuance of case sensitivity or the use of underscores made the slightest bit of difference, and indeed, I was never successful in getting firefox.exe to open with "-p" from a command line. It even taunted me, asking if perhaps what I was looking for might reside on C: drive or on some removable medium. Well duhhhh!! Did it think I wanted it to search the BIOS, for crying out loud? Jeez I hate XP with a passion! My contempt for that OS grows by the months and years. The only time I ever work with it is when I'm struggling with friends' machines. Yes, I know it is a greatly superior OS to 98SE. So, for the thousandth time, why then do I hate it so passionately? The best argument at the time of transition was that MS erred by making it significantly different than 98, requiring quite a lot of unlearning and relearning. They hide a lot of stuff from C:\Windows in new places, and although I was told of a very good tutorial comparing 98 to XP and noting the old and new ways of doing things, I could never seem to remember what that help file was called and where it lives in XP. In the heat of battle I could never seem to remember it. Anyway, at some point, upon opening 0.8 in the usual manner, up popped the Profiles wizard on its own. Did I want to create a new profile? You bet your bottom dollar I did! Quick like a bunny rabbit I made a new profile. What happened beyond there becomes a little murky, and I doubt I could accurately relate everything to save my life. But the bottom line is that once I had the new Profile (I had to make one twice!) and had all the preferences set the way he and I like them, Firefox 0.8 no longer was looking at the User Agent Switcher I had installed in 0.7. Oh, and BTW, as I remember, it was sufficient at the time to go into 0.7 and reset User Agent from IE to Default. Suddenly, neither 0.7 or 0.8 ever opened with the annoying MSjava warning again. I believe this was the case even before I created any new profiles, but I'm not real sure on that point.Here's the rub- the doggone warning window first popped up many weeks ago, long before that computer ever saw 0.8, so as best I can guess, something caused User Agent in 0.7 to switch from Default to IE6. Now, I can blame either gremlins or my friend. I certainly didn't make any change. So I'm going to blame my friend for now- he probably got in there in Firebird 0.7 and started fooling around with User Agent not even knowing what it is and does. That's my theory. Anyway, I'm not going to take the rap, and he's not here to defend himself. I'm remembering the elevator scene in "Ghostbusters" where one of the guys (Igor) comments about some shaky technical matter and then adds "I blame myself", to which his buddy responds "So do I". Then they all move a little further away from Igor :lol:So yesterday I got to run a victory lap around the computer room and briefly appear to know what I am doing. Well, not really, he knows how much trouble I had with it. You know what's funny? The warning you get implies that even XP or perhaps Firebird are also getting fooled into thinking they are IE6. I'm all for fooling some stupid, arrogant website into serving me pages because it thinks I'm running IE when I'm not- but what I experienced is a bit over the top. There is so much 'emulation' and downright dishonesty and deception on the net these days (I'm thinking here of 'phishing' scam emails and all the poor rubes who get victimized by them). "Oh what a tangled web we weave..." Indeed. I'm picturing here the scene in "Men In Black" when the alien who is traveling incognito in the desert with a van full of illegals gets his cover blown and goes ballistic.

Edited April 5, 2004 by Cluttermagnet

[Ed_P]

Jeez I hate XP with a passion! My contempt for that OS grows by the months and years. The only time I ever work with it is when I'm struggling with friends' machines. Yes, I know it is a greatly superior OS to 98SE. So, for the thousandth time, why then do I hate it so passionately?

Been there, done that Cluttermagnet. That's one of the reasons I didn't upgrade to XP with the CD my got me for Christmas '01 till last summer. I knew functions and features were there I just couldn't find the stupid things when I wanted to. Based on my experience if you upgrade to it and work(fight) with it for a week you'll have conquered it and will feel at home with it. By the end of a month it'll feel as comfortable as old underwear. Good to hear a happy ending to your friend's saga.

[Cluttermagnet]

Jeez I hate XP with a passion! My contempt for that OS grows by the months and years. The only time I ever work with it is when I'm struggling with friends' machines. Yes, I know it is a greatly superior OS to 98SE. So, for the thousandth time, why then do I hate it so passionately?

Been there, done that Cluttermagnet. That's one of the reasons I didn't upgrade to XP with the CD my got me for Christmas '01 till last summer. I knew functions and features were there I just couldn't find the stupid things when I wanted to. Based on my experience if you upgrade to it and work(fight) with it for a week you'll have conquered it and will feel at home with it. By the end of a month it'll feel as comfortable as old underwear. Good to hear a happy ending to your friend's saga.

Thanks, Ed. In that case, I could wear the old underwear over my head and take over an embassy. I was irritated enough to do something like that for a while there Well, I am gradually learning a little about XP out of necessity as I struggle with it on friends' machines. Not really much choice I guess. So all's swell that ends well. Next time I will know what to look for when XP starts acting up and asking for MSjava. There, take that, you magnificently obnoxious OS. And that! And...

[Neil P]

I went on to have a heck of a lot of trouble trying to get frickin' XP to open from a command line (Start/Run). It kept lying to me and trying to convince me that no such file existed anywhere on C: drive. I knew darned well that it did, but no nuance of case sensitivity or the use of underscores made the slightest bit of difference, and indeed, I was never successful in getting firefox.exe to open with "-p" from a command line. It even taunted me, asking if perhaps what I was looking for might reside on C: drive or on some removable medium. Well duhhhh!! Did it think I wanted it to search the BIOS, for crying out loud?

Cluttermagnet, to get the profile manager to open, all you had to do was go to the Properties menu of the shortcut, and in the Target box, there is the path to Firefox (C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe for instance) and all you had to do was add -p to the end of that. Sorry for not making that clear, it seems I could have saved you a bunch of trouble I am very glad that you got it to work though, good job!

[Cluttermagnet]

Cluttermagnet, to get the profile manager to open, all you had to do was go to the Properties menu of the shortcut, and in the Target box, there is the path to Firefox (C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe for instance) and all you had to do was add -p to the end of that. Sorry for not making that clear, it seems I could have saved you a bunch of trouble  I am very glad that you got it to work though,  good job!

D'oh! Yep, I can see that perfectly with 20/20 hindsight (now that you mention it). I have done that maneuver a good few times in 98SE- for example, when setting up specific commands for Steve Gibson's Wizmo utility. In the heat of battle, I was micro-focused on getting XP to do what I wanted it to do (what a concept!). As others have written, getting used to XP involves unlearning a bunch of things you used to do in Win98. 98SE would never give me a hard time over a simple thing like running an executable file with added switches from a command line. Silly me, I keep having a set of expectations based on the performance of Win98. I'm sure there must be a panel of Preferences hidden deep inside XP that has a key line item unchecked. My thankless task is to burrow deep into XP and find that item and check it. It reads "Do what the User asks you to do and don't act so snippy." Someone, I think it was probably nlinecomputers, gave me some great info about how to re-option Win Explorer in XP to make it have more of a Win98 look and feel. You know, tree view and other useful stuff like that instead of these endless pages of clickable icons. I remember when they started coming out with those 'universal', language independent traffic control signs some years back. At the time, the sign for pedestrians for "Do Not Walk" was a raised hand, palm outwards, and of course with the red "Do Not" circle/slash symbol over it. I took one look and said to myself "No Palm Reading" and just about split a gut I thought it was so funny. Later some bright person realized the shape should be that of a walking person with the Do Not symbol over it. Works better for me. Of course, someone else might interpret that one to mean "No Pedestrians" or "People Not Allowed- Go Away" or whatever. There are no universal icons. So much depends on a person's frame of reference. For example, having mastered Win98 and expecting XP to behave the same way. The one for hazardous nuclear waste really gives me the willys. You remember what that one looks like? To me, it says, "Stop by our nuclear reactor for a really great shave with our super-sharp Saracen blades. No Tipping, please."Firebird quickly became my favorite browser. I have recommended and installed if for some of my friends. Therefore anything that threatens its utility for them is immediate cause for concern. I'm really glad to have understood this problem and gotten through it. Thanks, guys, for all the help! Edited April 5, 2004 by Cluttermagnet

[Ed_P]

having mastered Win98 and expecting XP to behave the same way.

It can if you set a compatibility option of two. For example I have the My Computer icon on my desktop, just like W98. And the Start menu can be like Win98s but I now use the XP version.Next time you go to your XP friend's house to work on his pc remember:RIGHT click on a blank area of the Task Bar, click Properties, click on the Start Menu tab, choose the Classic Start menu option, click on OK. You'll begin to feel right at home. Did you go to Win9x from Win 3.1? And did you go to Win 3.1 from DOS? Win 9x to Win XP is about the same type of jump but with options to make the jump easier. Supposedly XP to the next version of Windows is gonna be similar. oh boy!

[Cluttermagnet]

RIGHT click on a blank area of the Task Bar, click Properties, click on the Start Menu tab, choose the Classic Start menu option, click on OK.  You'll begin to feel right at home. Did you go to Win9x from Win 3.1?  And did you go to Win 3.1 from DOS?  Win 9x to Win XP is about the same type of jump but with options to make the jump easier.  Supposedly XP to the next version of Windows is gonna be similar.  oh boy! 

Thanks, Ed-Good tip. I copy such info into Notepad and save as a text file. Later I grab bunches of XP hints and bring them along with my other software when I go calling on friends. BTW I started at Win95 and moved to 98 and then 98SE. I completely missed out on the joys of the DOS era. I did briefly fiddle with CP/M 'way back when', and also built up one of the original $100 Sinclair ZX-81 kits around the same time, but my interest in Windows and the internet didn't really begin until '96. I'm sure that folks who missed the DOS/Win3.0 era found Win95 to be less intuitive, due to a 'cold start' and lacking any context from experiencing those previous eras. I know I did. When XP came out, I read lots of accounts of user difficulties and lots of outrage at 'product (forced) activation'. I decided to take my time before jumping in with XP. Although I have since acquired a new machine more than powerful enough to run XP, I still haven't jumped. I think I will limit my education to times I encounter XP on friends' machines, and put all my efforts into learning Linux from the ground up instead. I can make that choice because I don't have to work on Windows computers for a living, it is only a very engaging hobby for me.

[Ed_P]

I'm sure that folks who missed the DOS/Win3.0 era found Win95 to be less intuitive, due to a 'cold start' and lacking any context from experiencing those previous eras.

Not really. The differences between DOS and Windows were day and night and many hated going to Windows. People had Lotus 123 and Word Perfect under DOS and weren't interested in learning what a mouse was let alone Office. The differences between Windows 3.1 and Windows 95 not much better. INI files which could be maintained/tweaked/controlled with any text editor got replaced with the Registry and a whole new desktop system. Basically with pcs there is constant change. You just have to close your eyes and bite the bullet. Based on your postings I have no doubt that you can learn Win XP and will pick it up quickly. But you will learn it best when you are immersed in it, ie you upgrade.And if you run into problems you know where to come for help. We won't let you drown.

[Cluttermagnet]

Aw, gee-Youse guys are OK- and you even put up with my complaining. This board has a generally sweet disposition, and people like that.

i post only at 1 other board, v. technical and it's as dry as cracker juice. 

Ewwww! Cracker juice? Scot's Forums are home sweet home for me. :w00t:More like chocolate, fruit, and nuts. Well, we're still checking on that, but that's the story up to now, anyway.