I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional
"Windows Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which
won't work in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and
also all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files
back and forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy
to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to
100% On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the
local disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?


[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine,
I need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating
PDF files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in
order to 'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will*
run in Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options
as Jaws).
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional "Windows
Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which won't work
in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy to
read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges etc.,
but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?


[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine, I
need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating PDF
files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in order to
'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will* run in
Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options as
Jaws).
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.


Have you tried Primo PDF - it allows a password on open, and a separate
password for protection that includes printing restrictions (No printing,
high res or low res), various change restrictions & disabling copying to
clipboard.

It's free too

Toby...

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional "Windows
Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which won't work
in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy to
read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

I assume that Office 2000 is patched to the hilt? All Service Packs applied?

JW

On 14/06/2010 11:12, John Whitworth wrote:


"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional
"Windows Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications
which won't work in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and
also all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files
back and forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite
happy to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to
100% On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the
local disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

I assume that Office 2000 is patched to the hilt? All Service Packs
applied?

JW


No, I just installed it on the virtual machine from an original CD. Is
that likely to be significant?
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 14/06/2010 11:12, John Whitworth wrote:


"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional
"Windows Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications
which won't work in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and
also all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files
back and forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite
happy to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to
100% On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the
local disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

I assume that Office 2000 is patched to the hilt? All Service Packs
applied?

JW


No, I just installed it on the virtual machine from an original CD. Is
that likely to be significant?
--
Cheers,
Roger

Haven't a clue to be honest - but I'd certainly try at least getting SP1, 2
and 3 on there.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:57:00 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

I assume that Office 2000 is patched to the hilt? All Service Packs
applied?

No, I just installed it on the virtual machine from an original CD. Is
that likely to be significant?

The virtual machine, as supplied, is also far from up to date. Worth
applying the XP fixes too.


--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional "Windows
Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which won't work
in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy to
read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges etc.,
but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?


[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine, I
need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating PDF
files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in order to
'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will* run in
Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options as
Jaws).

Don't use word 2000.
Try M$ word viewer if you don't need to make changes.
OO if you do.
Or have a look at the free office 2010 essentials that should be released
about now.

On Jun 14, 11:26*am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"Roger Mills" wrote in message

...



I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional "Windows
Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which won't work
in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy to
read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges etc.,
but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine, I
need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating PDF
files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in order to
'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will* run in
Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options as
Jaws).

Don't use word 2000.
Try M$ word viewer if you don't need to make changes.
OO if you do.

What do you do when OO doesn't render the document the same? Or screws
up the doc so it doesn't look the same when you go back to Office? It
happens.

MBQ

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 04:22:51 -0700 (PDT), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jun 14, 11:26*am, "dennis@home"
wrote:
"Roger Mills" wrote in message

...



I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional "Windows
Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which won't work
in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy to
read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges etc.,
but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine, I
need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating PDF
files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in order to
'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will* run in
Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options as
Jaws).

Don't use word 2000.
Try M$ word viewer if you don't need to make changes.
OO if you do.

What do you do when OO doesn't render the document the same? Or screws
up the doc so it doesn't look the same when you go back to Office? It
happens.

It also happens with different versions of MS Word.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional
"Windows Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which
won't work in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and also
all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files back and
forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy
to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to 100%
On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the local
disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?


[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine, I
need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating PDF
files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in order
to 'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will* run in
Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options as
Jaws).

Don't use word 2000.

I believe Roger raised this before - Office 2003 wasn't compatible with the
Jaws driver. If Office 2003 wasn't, it's unlikely that OO would be.

On 14/06/2010 12:36, John Whitworth wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...



Don't use word 2000.

I believe Roger raised this before - Office 2003 wasn't compatible with
the Jaws driver. If Office 2003 wasn't, it's unlikely that OO would be.

Not exactly. I'm pretty sure that I've used Jaws with Word 2003 (under
XP) in the past. If you can get Jaws running under a given operating
system, it seems then to work with all applications - it's just that it
won't work with Win 7 - hence the reason for running it (and needing to
run Word) on the Virtual XP machine.

I currently have a solution - of sorts - by copying files to be Jaws'd
onto the virtual machine's 'local' drive, and copying the resulting PDF
files back, but it's a bit messy, and I'd prefer to be able to access
the original files directly.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On 14/06/2010 10:13, Roger Mills wrote:

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy
to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to
100% On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the
local disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

They are probably trying to create and write a temp file in the same
folder as the opened file, and not succeeding. Normally the opening
application should then state "read only mode" and open the file, but
there might be subtle things afloat stopping it.

Try setting an audit policy in Windows 7 and then check out 7's event log.

Maybe host folders are accessed in WinXP as Win7's adminstrative file
shares.

http://microsoftblog.globalknowledge...7-file-shares/

--
Adrian C

On 14/06/2010 13:23, Adrian C wrote:
On 14/06/2010 10:13, Roger Mills wrote:



They are probably trying to create and write a temp file in the same
folder as the opened file, and not succeeding. Normally the opening
application should then state "read only mode" and open the file, but
there might be subtle things afloat stopping it.


That implies that the virtual machine has read access but not write
access to files on the host machine. But other applications running on
the virtual machine can write to the host quite happily - so I still
don't understand why Word should be any different.


Try setting an audit policy in Windows 7 and then check out 7's event log.

Maybe host folders are accessed in WinXP as Win7's adminstrative file
shares.

http://microsoftblog.globalknowledge...7-file-shares/



Thanks for the suggestion. I'll have a look.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 14/06/2010 13:23, Adrian C wrote:
On 14/06/2010 10:13, Roger Mills wrote:



They are probably trying to create and write a temp file in the same
folder as the opened file, and not succeeding. Normally the opening
application should then state "read only mode" and open the file, but
there might be subtle things afloat stopping it.


That implies that the virtual machine has read access but not write access
to files on the host machine. But other applications running on the
virtual machine can write to the host quite happily - so I still don't
understand why Word should be any different.


Try setting an audit policy in Windows 7 and then check out 7's event
log.

Maybe host folders are accessed in WinXP as Win7's adminstrative file
shares.

http://microsoftblog.globalknowledge...7-file-shares/



Thanks for the suggestion. I'll have a look.

I'd still be inclined to update whilst hunting for alternative solutions.
When Office 2000 was first brought out, Virtual computing was rather less
common.

JW

In message , Roger Mills
writes
but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Oooh, have you got Quicken installed and registered and in the UK?
Someone I was trying to help had it running perfectly on XPMode, but hit
a succession of immovable Quicken nonsenses when trying to get it
registered.
As far as I remember, she found that the UK registration site is no
more, Intuit UK said get lost, the Americans refused access and then
wouldn't deal with anyone outside their borders when she rang.
--
Bill

On 14/06/2010 15:09, Bill wrote:


Oooh, have you got Quicken installed and registered and in the UK?
Someone I was trying to help had it running perfectly on XPMode, but hit
a succession of immovable Quicken nonsenses when trying to get it
registered.
As far as I remember, she found that the UK registration site is no
more, Intuit UK said get lost, the Americans refused access and then
wouldn't deal with anyone outside their borders when she rang.

For me, registration isn't an issue - I've still got the original
Registration Number, and simply keyed that in when asked, with no need
to contact Intuit. I'm still using the free upgrade to Quicken 98 which
made it millennium compliant!

I've actually installed it on *both* the Win 7 host and the XP Virtual
machine. For most purposes - for managing my personal finances - it
works perfectly ok under Win 7. However, I also manage the finances of a
voluntary organisation which needs to issue the occasional invoice and -
for some inexplicable reason - the invoice function doesn't work in Win 7!

Incidentally, that's not the only program whose behaviour is different
between XP and Win 7. I have a program which scans music scores and
performs a sort of OCR on them to produce computer-readable music
notation. Under Win 7, everything come up in GERMAN - with no choice of
lanuage. Run the same program under XP, and it defaults to English -
with an option to use German instead. Explain that if you will!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

In message , Roger Mills
writes
On 14/06/2010 15:09, Bill wrote:


Oooh, have you got Quicken installed and registered and in the UK?
Someone I was trying to help had it running perfectly on XPMode, but hit
a succession of immovable Quicken nonsenses when trying to get it
registered.
As far as I remember, she found that the UK registration site is no
more, Intuit UK said get lost, the Americans refused access and then
wouldn't deal with anyone outside their borders when she rang.

For me, registration isn't an issue - I've still got the original
Registration Number, and simply keyed that in when asked, with no need
to contact Intuit. I'm still using the free upgrade to Quicken 98 which
made it millennium compliant!

I've actually installed it on *both* the Win 7 host and the XP Virtual
machine. For most purposes - for managing my personal finances - it
works perfectly ok under Win 7. However, I also manage the finances of
a voluntary organisation which needs to issue the occasional invoice
and - for some inexplicable reason - the invoice function doesn't work
in Win 7!

Incidentally, that's not the only program whose behaviour is different
between XP and Win 7. I have a program which scans music scores and
performs a sort of OCR on them to produce computer-readable music
notation. Under Win 7, everything come up in GERMAN - with no choice of
lanuage. Run the same program under XP, and it defaults to English -
with an option to use German instead. Explain that if you will!

That's interesting. I was fairly sure that her version had a serial
number that then took something from inside the machine, produced
another number that had to be checked in with Intuit to give the real
registration.
I've just checked with her and she says she gave up, and her accountant
produced a later version that didn't have to be registered. So all is
right with the world..
--
Bill

On 6/14/2010 3:13 AM, Roger Mills wrote:
I have an XP Virtual Machine running under Windows 7 Professional
"Windows Virtual PC" so that I can run some 'legacy' applications which
won't work in Win 7.

In the virtual machine, Windows Explorer shows a local disk (C and
also all the disks on the host machine - and allows me to copy files
back and forth.

Most of the applications running in the virtual machine are quite happy
to read and write data files on the host machine.

However Word 2000[1] (and Excel 2000) are not. If I try to open a file
from the host machine in Word, it just hangs - and CPU usage goes to
100% On the other hand, if I copy a file from the host machine to the
local disk, it then opens quite happily in Word.

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?


[1] In case you're wondering why I'm running Word in a virtual machine,
I need to use a particular pseudo printer driver (Jaws - for creating
PDF files) which won't work in Win7, and I need to open Word files in
order to 'print' them. (Yes, there are other PDF converters which *will*
run in Win7 - but I haven't yet found one with the same security options
as Jaws).

Hello Roger,

You might consider using a different VM manager. I am using portable
VirtualBox (Oracle's second maintenance release) and I have had no
problem with it under WindowsXP, Vista, or Windows7, Server 2003.

I like using VMs for testing. I also have one 16GB (fixed size) VDI that
I have installed Acrobat, and a few other commercial pieces of software
that I don't use often enough to have take up space on my production
computer.

With portable VirtualBox, I can run those applications literally on any
WindowsXP or newer Windows OS without having to do a real install of the
app. Since most commercial software doesn't want you running multiple
copies of it, I am not (as far as I know) in violation of the software's
EULA since I only have them installed on the VM. I do of course keep
backups of the VDI and do not loan/give the VDI to anyone.

Sincerely,
C.Joseph Drayton, Ph.D. AS&T

CSD Computer Services

Web site: http://csdcs.site90.net/
E-mail:

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...give yourself a pat on the back.

On 14/06/2010 11:09, John Whitworth wrote:


"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...give yourself a pat on the back.

But he hit the nail right on the head though.

Wife is ADC for the town's Beaver Scout Groups and has to send minutes
from the many meetings she has to attend, to many Beaver Scout Colonies.

When she bought herself a new fancy computer, she got complaints from
group Scout leaders that they couldn't open the minutes she was sending
them. Needless to say, she was using Word 2003. There is a problem with
later versions of word that they can't communicate with earlier versions.

I showed her how to make a RTF document and there have been no problems
since.

Dave

On 14/06/2010 17:15, dave wrote:


Wife is ADC for the town's Beaver Scout Groups and has to send minutes
from the many meetings she has to attend, to many Beaver Scout Colonies.

When she bought herself a new fancy computer, she got complaints from
group Scout leaders that they couldn't open the minutes she was sending
them. Needless to say, she was using Word 2003. There is a problem with
later versions of word that they can't communicate with earlier versions.

I showed her how to make a RTF document and there have been no problems
since.

Dave

Are you sure you don't mean Word 2007? AFAIK, all versions of word from
97 through 2003 used the same format - but 2007 defaults to docx format.
nevertheless, it's a trivial matter to tell it to save in 97-2003 format
- then everyone should be able to receive it.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:41:12 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

Are you sure you don't mean Word 2007? AFAIK, all versions of word from
97 through 2003 used the same format - but 2007 defaults to docx format.
nevertheless, it's a trivial matter to tell it to save in 97-2003 format
- then everyone should be able to receive it.

More to the point, there's an easy to install add-on for 2003 that allows
it to handle the 2007 formats...

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 14/06/2010 17:41, Roger Mills wrote:
On 14/06/2010 17:15, dave wrote:


Wife is ADC for the town's Beaver Scout Groups and has to send minutes
from the many meetings she has to attend, to many Beaver Scout Colonies.

When she bought herself a new fancy computer, she got complaints from
group Scout leaders that they couldn't open the minutes she was sending
them. Needless to say, she was using Word 2003. There is a problem with
later versions of word that they can't communicate with earlier versions.

I showed her how to make a RTF document and there have been no problems
since.

Dave

Are you sure you don't mean Word 2007? AFAIK, all versions of word from
97 through 2003 used the same format - but 2007 defaults to docx format.
nevertheless, it's a trivial matter to tell it to save in 97-2003 format
- then everyone should be able to receive it.

I know there is a work round, but try telling that to a total computer
illiterate :-(

My easiest escape route was to teach her how to change the file format
to RTF. This is a computer user that has to ask how she attaches
something to an e mail, be it a text file, or even worse, a photo that
wants re-sizing.

Regards

Dave

"dave" wrote in message
...
On 14/06/2010 11:09, John Whitworth wrote:


"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...give yourself a pat on the back.

But he hit the nail right on the head though.

He didn't really, did he? He just came out with the usual "I really do not
have a clue about computers or software development - lets blame everything
on Microsoft" argument. The nail sits with a file handling issue, which
shows it's ugly head when using virtualisation - something which didn't
exist in that form in 1999/2000 (Connectix Virtual PC 4 came about in 2001).

On 14/06/2010 19:05, John Whitworth wrote:

The nail sits with a file handling
issue, which shows it's ugly head when using virtualisation - something
which didn't exist in that form in 1999/2000 (Connectix Virtual PC 4
came about in 2001).

True. having said that, though, some applications (such as Quicken) -
which were also developed before virtualisation was around - *don't*
have a file handling issue. Strange!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

In ,
Roger Mills typed on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:40:34 +0100:
On 14/06/2010 19:05, John Whitworth wrote:

The nail sits with a file handling
issue, which shows it's ugly head when using virtualisation -
something which didn't exist in that form in 1999/2000 (Connectix
Virtual PC 4 came about in 2001).

True. having said that, though, some applications (such as Quicken) -
which were also developed before virtualisation was around - *don't*
have a file handling issue. Strange!

Well my experience with Word 97/2000, I must say Word puts temporary
files in some really weird places. Not a problem normally, but under
virtualization I can see this as a possible problem. I don't know, how
does the later versions of Word handle it? Does it handle it
differently?

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Windows XP SP3

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, John Whitworth wrote:


"dave" wrote in message
...
On 14/06/2010 11:09, John Whitworth wrote:


"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...give yourself a pat on the back.

But he hit the nail right on the head though.

He didn't really, did he? He just came out with the usual "I really do
not
have a clue about computers or software development - lets blame
everything
on Microsoft" argument.

Oh, how sweet. Is there a lot of money in jumping to incorrect
conclusions,
or is it just a hobby? You are aware that Microsoft are convicted
monopolists,
aren't you? And there are well documented cases of them designing APIs
to prevent competitors software from running? Or are you too busy sucking
Bill Gates' dick to notice?

My gosh, yes. I take it all back. Word 2000 doesn't work because of all the
reasons you state - particularly what I am doing with Bill.

Thanks for your well reasoned and considered response to this solution. It
all fits into place nicely now. I'm sure the OP is much happier.

One more for the killfile! :-)

In ,
Huge typed on 14 Jun 2010 10:47:57 GMT:
On 2010-06-14, John Whitworth
wrote:

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file
privileges etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000
applications) behave differently from (say) Quicken in this
respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...

Really? It wasn't intended to be. In the same way that what is likely
happening is that MS don't want you to be able to do what the OP
wants - they want you to buy another copy of Office for the host
machine. Although this is only a guess, based on years of experience
of watching people empty
their wallets into Bill Gates bank account.

give yourself a pat on the back.

Thanks, but there's no need.

Really? I bought MS Office 97 and MS Office 2000 and I stopped there. I
had to upgrade from MSO 97 because it had too many bugs that MSO 2000
fixed. I felt no reason to get the later versions as MS Office 2000
works just fine for me.

I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the
shelf unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC for
about a year and I was unimpressed with it.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Windows XP SP3

"BillW50" wrote in message
...

I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the shelf
unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC for about a
year and I was unimpressed with it.

Must admit, Windows 7 RC seemed to work flawlessly. It was only after
release that I started to get a bit squiffy.

In message , BillW50
writes
In ,
Huge typed on 14 Jun 2010 10:47:57 GMT:
On 2010-06-14, John Whitworth
wrote:

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file
privileges etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000
applications) behave differently from (say) Quicken in this
respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...

Really? It wasn't intended to be. In the same way that what is likely
happening is that MS don't want you to be able to do what the OP
wants - they want you to buy another copy of Office for the host
machine. Although this is only a guess, based on years of experience
of watching people empty
their wallets into Bill Gates bank account.

give yourself a pat on the back.

Thanks, but there's no need.

Really? I bought MS Office 97 and MS Office 2000 and I stopped there. I
had to upgrade from MSO 97 because it had too many bugs that MSO 2000
fixed. I felt no reason to get the later versions as MS Office 2000
works just fine for me.

I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the
shelf unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC for
about a year and I was unimpressed with it.


Better send one to me then

--
geoff

In ,
geoff typed on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:19:55 +0100:
I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the
shelf unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC
for about a year and I was unimpressed with it.

Better send one to me then

Really? You like Windows 7? After using it for about a year, I saw it
only capable of running 95% of what I want to do vs. Windows XP which
runs 100% of what I want. And Windows 7 eats up lots of CPU time just
while you are doing nothing. Windows XP when you are doing nothing, the
CPU is actually at or near idle. And running something that is very CPU
intensive like games, always runs slower under Windows 7 than it does
under Windows XP. So I don't see Windows 7 as any big deal and I can see
why some want to downgrade their Vista and Windows 7 machines. And I
don't blame them one bit. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Windows XP SP3

In message , BillW50
writes
In ,
geoff typed on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:19:55 +0100:
I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the
shelf unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC
for about a year and I was unimpressed with it.

Better send one to me then

Really? You like Windows 7? After using it for about a year, I saw it
only capable of running 95% of what I want to do vs. Windows XP which
runs 100% of what I want. And Windows 7 eats up lots of CPU time just
while you are doing nothing. Windows XP when you are doing nothing, the
CPU is actually at or near idle. And running something that is very CPU
intensive like games, always runs slower under Windows 7 than it does
under Windows XP. So I don't see Windows 7 as any big deal and I can see
why some want to downgrade their Vista and Windows 7 machines. And I
don't blame them one bit. ;-)


Wouldn't touch for my work machines, but, using VM , having bought a new
webcam, etc, it sort of works well enough

even turnpike is almost OK

but I agree

XP is rockandroll

--
geoff

"BillW50" wrote in message
...
In ,
geoff typed on Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:19:55 +0100:
I do regret buying two copies of Windows 7 that still sit up on the
shelf unopened. As I was running two copies of Windows 7 Ultimate RC
for about a year and I was unimpressed with it.

Better send one to me then

Really? You like Windows 7? After using it for about a year, I saw it only
capable of running 95% of what I want to do vs. Windows XP which runs 100%
of what I want. And Windows 7 eats up lots of CPU time just while you are
doing nothing. Windows XP when you are doing nothing, the CPU is actually
at or near idle. And running something that is very CPU intensive like
games, always runs slower under Windows 7 than it does under Windows XP.
So I don't see Windows 7 as any big deal and I can see why some want to
downgrade their Vista and Windows 7 machines. And I don't blame them one
bit. ;-)

Are you sure you actually have looked at windows 7?
None of what you say is true for me or anyone else I know with windows 7.
You can send me the other win7 if you don't want it. ;-)

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, John Whitworth wrote:


"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2010-06-14, Roger Mills wrote:

It's presumably got something to do with sharing and file privileges
etc., but why should Word (and other Office 2000 applications) behave
differently from (say) Quicken in this respect? Any ideas?

Because Microsoft are incompetent scum?

Useful...

Really? It wasn't intended to be. In the same way that what is likely
happening is that MS don't want you to be able to do what the OP wants -
they
want you to buy another copy of Office for the host machine. Although this
is only a guess, based on years of experience of watching people empty
their wallets into Bill Gates bank account.

What business *wouldn't* want you to buy new products? But I'm afraid your
argument really is flawed. In the vast majority of situations, Office 2000
is still a very good product, and there is no need to upgrade unless you
want either the eye candy or extra functionality of the later versions.
Extended support for Office 2000 was only discontinued last year.
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeoffice I really do not think that is
short-changing the customer, or incompetent, do you?

give yourself a pat on the back.

Thanks, but there's no need.

OK - smack your head into a concrete pillar a few times then. That might
make you feel better.

On 14/06/2010 11:47, Huge wrote:

In the same way that what is likely
happening is that MS don't want you to be able to do what the OP wants - they
want you to buy another copy of Office for the host machine.

No, that's not the issue. I've actually got Office 2007 on the host and
Office 2000 on the virtual machine. The issue is that of trying to get
Word 2000 on the virtual machine to be able to access *data* files (i.e.
documents) stored on the host.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.