In news:h2950g$jim$1@news.eternal-september.org,
~misfit~ typed on Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:19:37 +1200:
> Somewhere on teh intarwebs BillW50 wrote:
>> In news:h27pun$ho4$1@news.eternal-september.org,
>> BillW50 typed on Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:02:52 -0500:
>>> In news:Xns9C37EF8E0EF58noonehomecom@74.209.131.13,
>>> Larry typed on Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:32:58 +0000:
>>>> I'm using WinXPSP3 typing this message because it's convenient and
>>>> familiar with Xnews, a very old usenet client.
>>>
>>> I have one machine running XPSP3 and the rest running XPSP2. And I
>>> haven't seen any difference in stability or usability between SP2
>>> and SP3.
>>
>> Oh wait! There is one small difference. SP3 breaks OE6 auto-compacing
>> mode. As it usually hangs on folder.dbx. And Microsoft doesn't
>> support OE at all anymore, so there will never be a Microsoft fix
>> for it. Which might be one reason to stick with SP2. <grin>
>
> Thanks Bill, I was going to ask why, if there was no difference with
> stability or usability, only one of your machines was sp3.
>
> Oh, I find my XP Pro sp3 machines still auto-compact OE files just
> fine.

Hi Shaun. Well I don't see the big deal of having SP3 installed anyway.
And the big plus of only staying with SP2 is that it is much smaller.
Which is nice on small SSD drives. And I can't even install SP3 on my 4G
SSD machines because there isn't even enough room. Even if I use the
recovery disc to start over, that only leaves 400MB worth of room. SP3
claims it needs at least 450MB. Although I believe it actually needs at
least double this amount when I installed it on one of my 8G machines.

I don't know what to say about why yours works. As I have no personal
experience with the problem, just what I have read on the OE newsgroup.

Want to see something odd? My machines report:

SP2 v5.1.2600
SP3 v5.1.2600

SP2 and SP3 report the same version number. Doesn't that seem strange to
you?

--
Bill
Windows XP Pro SP2 (5.1.2600)
Asus EEE PC 702G8 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC