Dave-H

I wondered about that too. They also released an equivalent patch for IE8, which I'm now using on XP. Thanks for the heads-up about the new patch for IE6 SP1 CharlesF. I don't get a notification now I'm not running Windows 2000 any more.

EZ install on KDW is a way of trying to get XP applications to work under Windows 2000 without actually replacing any system dlls in the system32 folder. You select the folder where the application's executable is, using the "refer" button. Select the dlls you want to use (e.g. kernel32.dll) and press the EZ install button. That transfers the modified dll to the application's folder, along with a wrapper dll. I did have great success with that while I was still using KDW (I've gone over to XP now ) It also creates .local files which go with any executables in the folder. I'm not sure what these do, but they are sometimes necesary for it to work.

Yes, you're probably right, although explorer.exe, the Windows Explorer, does have the same problem. I've just tried another experiment. If I run the IE .lnk shortcut from a command line using the "start" command, both using the "run" option on the start menu, or a command prompt, IE opens up fine with the History display correct. However, if I run exactly the same command line using my desktop "Run" program, IE still opens, but without the History displayed correctly! This is what's baffling me, why the same command line should produce different results when run in different ways.

No, it's not that. When I open the IE browser using my "Run" program, everything works fine for browsing. However, if I go to View>Explorer Bars>History the bar opens with the History tab shown, but there is nothing there except a dropdown called "Search History". If I run the browser using the normal shortcuts there is a list of weeks and days there which allows me to see the history contents. That's what I don't understand. Why should running the browser two different ways produce different results?!

I am an Administrator, so it's not that. Just tried another test. If I go the the IE folder and double click the iexplore.exe file, IE opens with no History displayed. If I create a shortcut to the exe in the same folder, double clicking that produces the same result. However, if I cut and paste the same shortcut to the desktop, and double click it, it still runs IE, but this time with the History displayed! Curiouser and curiouser........ I'm wondering if maybe it's a path problem.

Indeed it can be and is, but that's not the problem! It opens up fine, but there's nothing there except the "search" dropdown if I run IE using my desktop "Run" program. If I run IE using a shortcut, the weeks and days of the history are displayed. I was just asking why one method of running IE works, and the other doesn't when they at at least superficially identical.

Hi, this is my first post in this forum, having recently upgraded my old faithful Windows 2000 installation to XP SP3. I have upgraded everything I can to the latest versions, including IE, and am now using IE8. Everything seems to be fine apart from one strange problem. The History information is not showing, all it shows is a "Search History" dropdown, and nothing else. This is the case both in Internet Explorer and Windows Explorer. I did some research on this, and while it doesn't seem to be a unique problem, there seems to be only a few suggestions for fixes, none of which worked in my case when I tried them. I then by pure chance, found something very strange. I use a program called "Run" on my desktop, which allows me to run applications from one click on a button in a window. It's an ancient 16 bit program, that doesn't even recognise non 8.3 DOS file names, but it has always worked fine. It will only run executable files, not shortcuts. I use it to run IE and Windows Explorer among many other programs. I found by pure chance that if I run IE or Explorer using a "proper" shortcut, the History works, but not if I run it using the "Run" program! What the difference is I completely fail to see. The "target" command line and the "start in" path is exactly the same in the "Run" program as it is on the shortcut, so why would they produce different results? I am baffled! This did not happen with IE6 SP1, which is what I had to use with Windows 2000 of course. I did briefly have IE6 SP2 before I upgraded to IE8, but I'm afraid that I didn't notice whether this happened with that version or not. I've tried experimenting with running the IE shortcut from the "Run" program instead of running the exe directly, but haven't had much success. This isn't a big problem, more just an annoying niggle, but I really would like to know why it's happening if anyone has any ideas. Thanks, Dave.

IIRC just put the dll in the system32 folder, but you may need to then register it. What was the problem with ezinstall? It always worked fine for me.

Thanks for that. Actually I've now bitten the bullet and upgraded to Windows XP, so the problem has gone away! It's all useful stuff for anyone else with the same issue though, who may not be able or wish to upgrade. I did in fact install and try the Canon TWAIN driver, and as you surmised, it worked but wouldn't recognise my camera. It seems that Nikon never produced an equivalent package. I also looked at Cam2PC, but that didn't seem to do the trick either.

Indeed that sad day will all too soon be upon us. With the end of support for Windows 2000 that will be I assume the end of support for IE6 SP1 completely too, and I don't believe that SP2 will be very far behind...........

Well, the deed is done, and everything is getting straight. So far, I have no regrets whatsoever! I think I can even get my Windows Explorer folders looking like they did in 2000 again with a bit of hacking, which I wasn't expecting to be able to do. I thought I'd post one more time here just to say that the two Network Connections icons in Control Panel was due to the entry in the registry at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace producing one icon, and the cpl file producing the other! I removed the registry entry, and all was well. However I had to reinstall Windows again, for reasons I won't bore you all with, and the double icons came back! It must be a bug in Windows setup. Whether it's due to it being an update rather than a clean install I don't know. Just thought I'd mention the fix here in this thread in case anyone searches the forum for the same problem. At least all the observations will be in one place then. Now I really am heading for the XP forum! Cheers all, Dave. (I know it's a "hello" emoticon, but I'm using it as a "goodbye" one!)

Well, I found the cause of the WMI access problem! To my eternal shame, I eventually phoned MS about it, convinced that it had to be an OS configuration problem. I had to pay them too, which really hurt! Of course if I'd actually thought about it a bit more, I would have done myself exactly what they told me to do. As soon as I said it was all right in Safe Mode, they just told me to use msconfig to disable all non-MS services. I did this, and everything worked! Grrrrrrrr!! I then went through the process of elimination to find which service was causing the problem, and found to my great surprise that it was Windows Defender! Although this is a Microsoft program, its service isn't included as an MS service, presumably because it's not part of the OS. I uninstalled Windows Defender and reinstalled it, and everything came good. Boy was I kicking myself that I'd actually paid MS to tell me something that had I used any common sense I could have easily found out for myself! I was so convinced that it had to be a fundamental OS problem though, especially as it always worked fine after the first reboot after setup, when WD was running! It only failed after a subsequent reboot. I guess I'll never know why that was....... Anyway, all is now working, Windows/MS Update, Msinfo, and Remote Assistance, and the Network Connections folder is fine. I've still got two icons for it in Control Panel though, that's the next investigation! I'm going to the XP forum from now on for problems. I hope they're nice over there! Cheers, Dave.

I deleted the registry Control Panel namespace entry for the Network Connections window, and also deleted the cpl files. There seemed to be two of them, one called netsetup.cpl, and one called ncpa.cpl. I had to remove both of them before both the Network Connections icons disappeared from Control Panel. Needless to say, when I reinstalled Windows again they all came back, and I've got two Network Connections icons in Control Panel again! Surely this isn't normal? The two icons seem to do exactly the same thing! I've gradually resolved some of the outstanding problems, but one big one remains! The problem with MSInfo, the blank Network Connections folder, and the fact that I can't get Windows Update to work all seem to have the same root cause. Remote Assistance isn't working either. The system can't access the cimv2 namespace. Everywhere where it tries to do this, I just get an "Access Denied" message. I've now reinstalled Windows XP twice, and the same thing happens every time. After setup completes, the first time Windows boots up everything works fine. The Network Connections window is populated, MSInfo works, Windows Update works, Remote Assistance works. All is fine until I reboot, then everything stops working again! Logging off and on doesn't cause this problem, only a reboot does. I've searched and searched about this, and tried every resolution offered, but nothing fixes it. It looks like a permissions problem, but there is only the Administrator and Guest account on the machine. The Guest account is turned off, and I am the default Administrator, so why can't I access these things!

There are several utilities available to extract the files from installers. I use Universal Extractor, which I've always found works pretty well. http://www.softpedia.com/get/Compression-t...Extractor.shtml Download this, and open the QuickTime installer file with it. It will extract all the component files into a folder, including the msi installer files.

Hi again guys! Some progress made. I checked the name of the Administrator account in all the places mentioned, and it was still "Dave"! Why it comes up as "Administrator" on the login screen still, and the start menu still says "Log off Administrator" I have no idea, very odd as it certainly wasn't like that on 2000. Anyway I now have the system set to log on automatically anyway and I've got my familiar old shut-down screen back. I found an option in "User Accounts" in Control Panel called "Change the way users log on or off". This allows you to turn off the welcome screen, and that seemed to do the trick. Still no joy with the Network Connections window. The two icons for it in control panel I think are being caused by there being a .cpl file and an entry in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace referring to the Network Connections applet. Could someone with XP tell me which of these is the correct one and I'll try deleting the other. Incidentally, the two icons produce different tooltips when you hover over them. One says "Connects to other computers, networks, and the internet" and the other says "Configures network software". This might also give a clue as to which one is the rogue imposter! Another couple of issues (I don't want to take this to the XP forum until I've at least resolved problems stemming from the upgrade) are that WMI isn't working, and Windows Update isn't working either. If I try and use MSInfo none of it works, and I just get a message saying "Windows Management files may be moved or missing". If I try and use MS Update or Windows Update, I get error 0x800A0046. I've been through all the steps suggested to resolve this error, cleared all my cache and cookies, but no joy. Anyone any quick fixes for either of these?! Den, I have still got all my backups of the old system files. The only thing I foolishly forgot to do was backup the files on C:\, the root of the system drive. I hope I won't need them......... Cheers, Dave.

Well, the deed has been done! It seemed to take ages, but I was impressed with the fact that XP setup did manage to preserve most of my customised settings from Windows 2000. All of this is now something for the XP forum of course, but before I sign this thread off and start loads more in that forum(!) there are just a couple of anomalies I'd like a view on. One thing that surprised me is that the XP start-up and shut-down screens don't look the same as they did when I used XP Pro at work. At work they looked pretty much the same as the Windows 2000 ones, but on my new installation, they look like the XP Home ones. I've got all the themes set to classic, as I had at work, but that has not changed. Anyone any idea why? It doesn't say "Professional" on the XP opening splash screen, which I'm sure it did at work. The only thing that didn't work when I restarted was my network adapter, but that was because setup couldn't find a file that in fact wasn't on the system. I reinstalled the drivers and everything appeared to be fine, but I still couldn't connect to the internet! The Network Connections window was blank, no icons in it. It should have had two old dial-up connections and my ethernet connection in it. There was also two Network Connections icons in the Control Panel, both of which seemed to do the same thing, bring up the empty window. Not looking good! Anyway, after a lot of fruitless investigation, I ran setup again. This time there were no error messages, the network adapter was fine, and the NC window was populated. After a bit of juggling, I got the connection to work. Still two icons in Control Panel though. Re-booted, and the windows was blank again, although the connection is still working! Any ideas anyone? If I refresh the window it says it can't create icons and to check that the Network Connections service is running. It is. Another funny is that I don't like being called "Administrator"! I changed the user name for the administrator account to "Dave" on Windows 2000, but that hasn't been replicated. I can't find where to change it in Windows XP. The help files refer to an "advanced" tab on the User Accounts applet, which I expect is where this option will be, but the advanced tab isn't there! Any pointers on any of this much appreciated, and I promise I'll go the XP forum afterwards! Cheers, Dave.

Well, my OEM disk arrived, and of course I couldn't do an upgrade with it, as you rightly warned me! Annoyingly, the firm I bought it from wouldn't take it back either. They don't have retail versions anyway, and they wouldn't refund my money as I had opened the package to check the installation instructions, even though I hadn't actually opened the packaging of the disk itself. Apparently people order these cheap(er) OEM versions just to get the product code, and they're not interested in the actual disk. Presumably this is so they can activate illegal copies. You can only get a refund if the package is returned untouched exactly as received. I'll remember that in future! Anyway, I've now got a proper retail version from another supplier. What I ordered was an upgrade version, but what has arrived is actually a full version as far as I can see, in that doesn't need an upgradable version of Windows to be already present on the machine. So, here goes. Wish me luck!

I assume you've seen this Charlotte. http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=334421 In fact you may even have posted to it under another name, but it looks as if you're not alone! I've never seen this problem myself under Windows 98 or Windows 2000, perhaps I'm one of the lucky ones..... Cheers, Dave.

Reference to the Knowledge Base in Opera support gives a different view at http://www.opera.com/support/kb/view/375 I have, so far as I can remember, always had Enable Java unchecked in all my years of using Opera and have never come across the need to enable it. There again I don't have problems with Opera. HTH Ah, I stand corrected! I must have mis-understood something I read ages ago about Opera and Java. I think what I said about the plugins still applies though.

****, I obviously didn't do enough research! The copy I've ordered is definitely an unbranded OEM copy. I'll wait until it arrives and see what the installation instructions that supposedly come with it say. If I can't do an upgrade, which is what I really want to do, I'll see if the company I bought it from will swap it for a full version. I don't mind paying the extra price. Thanks submix8c for warning me.

Opera has never needed the Sun Java Runtime to be installed, it has its own Java support built in. I think that has always been the case, at least back to version 7. They say that you should always remove any references to Java plugins in the plugins list (Tools>Advanced>Plug-ins), as they can cause conflicts. You can do that by adding them to plugin-ignore.ini.

Thanks guys! Still waiting for that disk to arrive, but the time is near.......... I was a bit worried that submix8c said that I had to do a clean install. I know that's what you've all recommended that I do anyway, but I would like to try an upgrade install first. Surely I can always do a new clean install later if I'm not happy with the results of that. Looking here it does appear that you can do an upgrade install from Windows 2000 to XP Professional, but not to XP Home Edition. As I said, I need XP Pro anyway as I have a dual processor machine and that isn't supported by XP Home AFAIK. Will keep you updated! Cheers, Dave.

Happy New Year everyone! I've been using Windows 2000 ever since it was first released, and am very attached to it as an operating system. However, I feel that the time has come for me to seriously consider getting rid of it. It's not just because the security updates will cease this summer, although that is a factor. I'm just getting increasingly frustrated that so many software writers will not now allow their latest versions to work on it. So, my first decision was what should I go for if I do bite the bullet and upgrade? I dual boot with Windows 98SE, which I have vowed never to abandon, so going for a non-Microsoft OS didn't seem to be a sensible course. Vista was a non-starter as far as I could see, so the choice was between Windows 7 or trying to get hold of a copy of XP. I had used XP for several years at work before I retired, so I was well familiar with it. Windows 7 looked a bit too much like an "upgrade too far". As well as the fact that it's brand new, and not even on its first service pack yet, and therefore still likely to be full of "issues", I was rather put off by the fact that it apparently won't install on a FAT32 drive. I need to keep FAT32 for compatibility with Windows 98, and although I gather that there are ways around this, it did seem to be a bit of an un-necessary complication to the upgrade. Even if I did get it to work on a FAT32 drive, how well would it coexist with Windows 98? Also, you can't do an upgrade from Windows 2000 to Windows 7 it seems, presumably because they are so different. You have to do a clean install, which means rebuilding all the software on the computer, not something I relish the thought of, and that's even before any problems caused by hardware driver incompatibilities with Windows 7! Windows XP does seem like the best bet. I have always thought that the fact that there was such a huge gap in between XP being released and Vista being released was down to the fact that MS pretty much got it right with XP, and were flailing around a bit trying to find justification for replacing it. Poor old Windows 2000, it barely had a year between being released and being replaced! Vista (and Windows 7) look to me that they don't offer a whole lot more fundamentally than XP. All they seem to have done is make it look prettier (although that's a matter of opinion!) and added a load of fancy effects to the GUI which I for one have zero interest in. There's not obviously much fundamentally new "under the hood" technology there unless someone can tell me otherwise. Most new computing technologies that have come in the last ten years seem to be supported by XP anyway. So, I've managed to find a brand new OEM copy of Windows XP Pro (I need that as I have a dual processor motherboard) with the (latest and I assume last) SP3 updates included. All legal I hasten to add! When it arrives I will, with some trepidation, put the disk in my drive and run setup! Goodbye Windows 2000, you served me long and faithfully. The thing I will really miss on Windows 2000 are my customisations. I'm assuming that things like my appearance settings will be preserved, and I know from experience at work that I can make XP look pretty much the same as the look of 2000 I'm used to. One thing I do have however is a large number of customised shortcuts in the Windows Explorer windows, which allowed me to easily jump between my most used folders. I gather that the facility to do that (by editing the HTML templates) has been completely removed in XP and later systems. If anyone knows how to still do it, I'd be very grateful to know! I'll also miss the nice big preview thumbnails that I have for image and video files in Windows Explorer. I don't think the facility for video preview is there at all in XP, and as I do a lot of work with video files, that is going to be a real pain. IIRC the only image preview thumbnails in XP are tiny postage stamp things too, and that can't be changed. Again if anyone knows how to get any of this functionality back I'd love to know! Still, I suppose I am looking forward to being able to finally install the latest versions of most of my programs, without hacks! As I said elsewhere it's sad that with a few honourable exceptions like blackwingcat, few have tried to keep Windows 2000 alive, unlike Windows 98, which seems to have a whole community devoted to keeping it alive! I suppose that's because Windows 2000 was never a mass market consumer OS, so its domestic user base is very small. Anyway, enough rambling! Have I made the right decision? Dave.

Did you fix your multiple download tabs problem Charlotte?

Thanks for that no1none. I am familiar with Orca and have used it quite a few times to make msi files compatible with Windows 2000. Unfortunately that isn't the problem in this case, as the installer isn't an msi file. I used Universal Extractor (another great tool BTW) to extract the files from the installer, in an attempt to do a manual installation. This has come to nothing unfortunately, as I think there are probably just too many system file version dependencies.