Thank you!

[slankenbrandt]

I just want to say that having moved from Win95 to WinNT + Office 2003 I am
SOOO impressed! I LOVE the contact data on Outlook and the fact that you can
merge to Word, such a timesaver! I haven't even got to play with Excel yet,
I can't wait to see how you've improved your products!

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

I just want to say that having moved from Win95 to WinNT + Office
2003 I am SOOO impressed! I LOVE the contact data on Outlook and the
fact that you can merge to Word, such a timesaver! I haven't even
got to play with Excel yet, I can't wait to see how you've improved
your products!

1) This isn't Microsoft - this is a peer-to-peer newsgroup.

2) If you *really* mean Windows NT (as in Windows NT4.5 which was the
last version to be referred to as such) then maybe you'd care to enlighten
everyone as to how you got it to install - WindowsNT does *NOT* support
Office 2003 - it requires Windows 2000 (SP3 or later), Windows XP or Windows
2003. The install process would fail, informing you that a later version of
Windows (and the versions) was required.

 

[IanRoy]

Hi, Miss Perspicacia Tick;
I thought Windows XP was NT 5.1, with Windows 2000 being NT 5.0. However,
the function =INFO("osversion") in Excel on my system returns: Windows
(32-bit) NT 5.01. I have Windows XP Home.
Ian.

 

[Dian Chapman, MVP, MOS]

Hi Ian...

Without getting technical, Win NT was put to bed with ver 4.x. And at
one time, Win2000 was proclaimed to be the "next version" of NT. Win2K
does run off the NT "kernel" which is the base of it's system files,
to put it mildly. And yes, now WinXP also runs off that same main
system.

Previously, Windows has two types of internal systems...one was more
for the home user and one was more for the business user. WinXP takes
the best of both worlds and finally merges them together more or less
(although you'll get lots of arguments on that idea from the hardcore
geeks<smile>)...so yes, Win 2K and XP are "based" on the NT internal
workings...but saying that you're running NT 5 will get many jumping
out of the woodwork to tell you you have no idea what you're talking
about...as you've seen.<wink>

This TechTrax article explain the issue a bit further if you're
interested:

WinXP_01: Customizing the Look
http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/Pub0009/LPMArticle.asp?ID=288

(See the article section "A Brief History")

Hope this helps...

Dian D. Chapman, Technical Consultant
Microsoft MVP, MOS Certified
Editor/TechTrax Ezine

Free Tutorials: http://www.mousetrax.com/techtrax
Free Word eBook: www.mousetrax.com/books.html
Optimize your business docs: www.mousetrax.com/consulting
Learn VBA the easy way: www.mousetrax.com/techcourses.html

 

[IanRoy]

Hi, Dian Chapman;

I am not the original poster (slankenbrandt), so I was not the one jumped
on, but there was quite a lot of discussion on this board:
http://bbs.xvsxp.com/forums/ about what version XP is, and how much improved
from earlier Windows. When I checked (Explorer> Help> About Windows) and saw
version 5.1 I figured that had to be (NT) 5.1, as there haven't been that
many versions of XP, have there? Anyway, I recently learned of the INFO
function in Excel, and was surprised to see it come up 5.01 instead of 5.1.
Any ideas on why that would be?

I have this in common with slankenbrandt: I moved (at home) directly from
Win95 to WinXP (I assumed this is the version of "NT" slankenbrandt meant
). Like that poster, I could hardly be more pleased with the improvements. So
if any Microsoft employees happen to read this, please accept my compliments
as well.

Cheers to all,
Ian.

 

[Dian Chapman, MVP, MOS]

Hi Ian...

The version numbers have to do with the BUILD number that the
developers create. The detailed numbers really only come up when
you're dealing with some more technical issues, to make sure you're
using the same build. Just as an FYI...each number shows the level of
change in that build. A change from 4.0 to 5.0 is a major version
change. From 5.0 to 5.1 is a fairly revised update with some fixes for
issues in ver 5.0. And a change to the next level just lowers the
importance of the fixes in that build. So a change from 5.0 to 5.0.1
would be a minor fix.

I don't know all the fix levels in all the builds. That's something
you'd have to research to figure out.

However, it also references the KERNEL or the inner development code.
So as I said, yes, WinXP is built from that same NT technology.
However, to get the exact meaning of all the build numbers, you'd have
to reference some more technical MS documents.

Just knowing that you have Windows XP and whether it is the Pro or
Home version is pretty much good enough. However, now that SPs are out
(service packs), it's important to also reference that so techies know
if you have the latest fixes applied. For example, if you just said
you had WinXP Pro, there might be a know bug in that original version
and a support person might suggest getting an update. By adding that
you are running WinXP Pro SP2, you provide them further info so they
know you have the latest already so they can discount any previous
bugs.

Yes, if you've just moved from Win95 to WinXP...that's QUITE a
leap...so you'll be in for a little user interfact shock. Glad to hear
that you like the changes. And yes, although many MS folks do read
these posts, I'll be sure to pass along these comments. I know they'll
be happy to get them.

And since you've just moved to XP, you'll have a lot of learning to do
to familiarize yourself with the new operating system interfact. Know
that I have a series of free WinXP lessons available in my popular
ezine: TechTrax (www.mousetrax.com/techtrax).

Go here to the direct archives page and enter WinXP in the search and
you'll find a series of WinXP articles that will help you learn a lot
of what you can do in Windows...written in a non-technobabble format
so it's easy to understand without the gibberish.

http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/Pub0009/LPMFrame.asp?CMD=Archives

Good luck...enjoy!

Dian D. Chapman, Technical Consultant
Microsoft MVP, MOS Certified
Editor/TechTrax Ezine

Free Tutorials: http://www.mousetrax.com/techtrax
Free Word eBook: www.mousetrax.com/books.html
Optimize your business docs: www.mousetrax.com/consulting
Learn VBA the easy way: www.mousetrax.com/techcourses.html

 

[Bob Buckland ?:-\)]

Hi Ian,

FWIW, there appears to be a bug in Excel's 2003
=info("osversion"). Thanks for reporting the issue.

You are correct that Windows 2000 should report
5.0.x and Windows XP should report 5.1.x

=========
Hi, Dian Chapman;

I am not the original poster (slankenbrandt), so I was not the one jumped
on, but there was quite a lot of discussion on this board:
http://bbs.xvsxp.com/forums/ about what version XP is, and how much improved
from earlier Windows. When I checked (Explorer> Help> About Windows) and saw
version 5.1 I figured that had to be (NT) 5.1, as there haven't been that
many versions of XP, have there? Anyway, I recently learned of the INFO
function in Excel, and was surprised to see it come up 5.01 instead of 5.1.
Any ideas on why that would be?

I have this in common with slankenbrandt: I moved (at home) directly from
Win95 to WinXP (I assumed this is the version of "NT" slankenbrandt meant
). Like that poster, I could hardly be more pleased with the improvements. So
if any Microsoft employees happen to read this, please accept my compliments
as well.

Cheers to all,
Ian>>
--
Let us know if this helped you,

Bob Buckland ?
MS Office System Products MVP

*Courtesy is not expensive and can pay big dividends*

Office 2003 Editions explained
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/office/editions.mspx

 

[IanRoy]

Hi, Bob Buckland;
I just saw your post. Thanks for the version information.
Regards,
Ian.