Re: Oracle 10g Server on Windows XP Pro

"Ian Smith" <ian.smith_at_irascian.com> wrote in message news:de616ff6.0405262155.5b11a68f_at_posting.google.com...
> Well I shouldn't be surprised at your response - you pretty much set
> the tone from the "get go".

Why? Because I pointed out that what you claimed was a single-user operating system was no such thing?

> Typo's happen occasionally.

Typos are one thing, Ian. Including bad links in two consecutive postings is not a typo, but carelessness.

> That's the real world. Yes I mistyped 9 as
> 8 - it's hardly rocket science to work out that changing that might
> take you to the right place.

How many posts do you think I respond to a day, Ian? Do you think I have the time or the inclination to mind-read my way through to working out what a poster *meant* to say? Do you think *any* poster here has the time or inclination to do that? Especially when the original poster has already been asked several times to say a few factual things, correctly, precisely and concisely.

And a small slip-up between '8' and '9' doesn't explain why you later included a completely different link as an explanation as to how you uninstalled 9i... which turns out to be a link to how you remove a service from a Windows machine

>I didn't copy the link as I was on a
> different machine, at work, one hour after I should have left.
> Unfortunately in trying to cut and paste sections of my original
> response into the appropriate sections of your long diatribe whilst
> ensuring I wasn't in the office until midnight, the ENTER button got
> hit and Goodle doesn't have a "remove posting" so you can finish
> editing. And yes, it's left me somewhat with egg on my face. The link
> to the original article was one of the things that got overwritten in
> that cut and paste - hence the new message.

Blather, blather, blather. It is *you* asking for help here. It is, I would have thought, your responsibility to make sure that what you type is what you meant to type.

>If I hadn't posted it
> you'd have had a long whinge about that too no doubt.

Er, no. If you hadn't posted anything, that would have been the end of the thread. I tend not to get upset when threads end.

>It seems that
> where you're concerned it's a case of "damned if you do, damned if you
> don't".

What you don't like about this, Ian, is that you have posted four times with heated opinion, and not once with cool, calm, rational fact. I have tried to be helpful, and to prompt you into providing further information that would allow me to be more helpful still. But, for some reason I can't fathom, you think it is me that is at fault because you can't provide minimum technical information without making chronic stuff-ups and larding it all with unnecessary and ill-founded 'opinion'.

I have made very careful efforts to ensure I did *not* suggest you were stupid or incompetent or otherwise deficient, but merely to state that the quality of the information you have provided in this thread is so poor that I cannot help you. If you consider that 'damning' you, then so be it. The quality of your postings still remains poor.

> On the one hand you're criticising me for having a go at the Oracle
> 10g uninstall info in their install guide making no sense and then
> lower down in your response you admit it's wrong and needs
> re-ordering.

I'm criticising you, Ian, for attitude. For a person who can neither describe their operating system correctly, nor their hardware setup adequately, nor make a post here without apparently letting a hippopotamus loose on their keyboard, nor achieve a successful installation of Oracle's most-easily installed product, you are in no position, I venture to suggest, to start criticising Oracle's documentation.

That their documentation is not perfect is not in dispute, and never has been in dispute, on this newsgroup. But I suggest its quality, or lack thereof, has had precisely *zero* impact on your ability, or lack thereof, to install 10g.

> I was told by our DBA that ASM was installed by default.

So now it gets even more interesting. You have a DBA. Why don't you just get him to do the installation for you then?

>I thought it
> odd but took him at his word and tried to follow the uninstall
> instructions.

So, let's get this straight. You didn't *know* whether you had ASM installed or not, but thought you'd try and uninstall it just in case. Why am I not surprised?

> The information that you had installed Oracle on XP Pro many times was
> useful - a shame you didn't say this upfront in response to my first
> email.

From my very first post in this thread, I quote:

"I've installed 10g on multiple Windows 2000 Pro, Server, Advanced Server, Windows 2003 Server, and XP Pro machines, not to mention assorted Linux distros, and not once had a problem. However, all of those Windows installations are characterised by having proper networking, DNS, and user authentication mechanisms in place before I start."

Now which bit of that did you not understand, or (more likely) fail to read.

That just about sums up your ability to be precise, accurate, and informative, don't you think?

Incidentally, and bearing in mind the trickle of information we got from your last post, I would further suggest that this one small paragraph from my earlier post actually contains the answer to your problem: your rather 'free' approach to networking. (Precisely where did you read that it was sensible to install onto any machine in the universe that gets its IP address via DHCP? Particularly a machine that is for configured for DHCP but which isn't actually connected to the network at the time?)

> By the way, are you as rude to your paying customers as you have been
> here? Do you get much business?

I tend not to have customers who behave as intellectually lazily as you have in this thread, so it's not an issue, Ian. So you don't need to worry about it.

HJR Received on Thu May 27 2004 - 01:44:04 CDT