3036a43f   
   XPost: alt.windows-xp, microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment,   
   microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support   
   XPost: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general   
   From: greegor47@gmail.com   
      
   G > When I went to find the latest DirectX it appeared   
   G > that 9.0c was the last "vintage" for WinXP.   
      
   DHL > Why are you Multi-Posting to all those news   
   DHL > groups and not one is  a m.p.directx.* news   
   DHL > group ?  They exist!   
   DHL > For example:   
   DHL > What does  m.p.windowsxp.setup_deployment   
   DHL > have to with an update of an OS sub-component ?   
      
   G > What would Windows XP setup and deployment   
   G > have to do with setting up a Microsoft windows   
   G > component called DirectX?   
   G > Surely you jest.   
      
   DHL > This is NOT a case of [you] installing   
   DHL > Windows XP from scratch nor deploying   
   DHL > WinXP in an evironment.   
      
   Perhaps not in the traditional IT sense of operating   
   a corporate update server and pushing everything   
   from there to each machine...  However, I'm   
   trying to build an ideal "master" for cloning   
   to my little "fleet" of identical OEM computers.   
      
   DHL > You are discussing updating a   
   DHL > sub-component of WinXP (that happens   
   DHL > to exist in multiple OS versions )  and   
   DHL > thus  m.p.windowsxp.setup_deployment   
   DHL > is not a valid news group.   
      
   Even if it were not as extremely OS dependent   
   as it is, I would still disagree with your view.   
      
   G > Every usenet group on the list is about Windows XP.   
      
   DHL > That doesn't make it correct to post to all   
   DHL > of them and you failed to even post in the   
   DHL > m.p.directx.* hierarchy.  If you are going to   
   DHL > discuss DirectX under XP [then] look under   
   DHL > m.p.directx.* for an appropriate news group.   
      
   Perhaps you are approaching this as a software   
   developer based on the platform this creates.   
   You suggest approaching it beginning as a platform.   
      
   I am approaching this as a user and see it only   
   as a necessity extension of WinXP for general   
   functionality.   
      
   If somebody is trying to build a good general-purpose   
   master system to clone, you would force them   
   to go to specific usenet groups for each of the   
   little extensions like Adobe, Java, Codecs, MSE, etc.   
      
   Aren't you being a rediculous purist in that sense?   
      
   The hierarchy options under microsoft.public.directx:   
   graphics    audio    video    misc     input_devices   and   
   app_compat   ( last post May 7 2010 )   
   ( d3dx9_38.dll was discussed in 2008 relative to 64 bit XP )   
   ( D3D9D.dll on XP was apparently only a DEBUG version, in SDK.)   
      
   G > As I assume you KNOW, Windows XP support is   
   G > coming to a close next year.   
      
   DHL > That's a moot point.   
      
   I disagree.  I think that's a GIGANTIC point!   
      
   G > On top of that, usenet newsgroups have been   
   G > collapsing for lack of use.  Usenet itself is fading as well.   
   G >   
   G > Rounding up the last and best versions of   
   G > Windows installs and updates should be of   
   G > interest to anybody associated with Windows XP.   
   G >   
   G > If you're going to just walk away from Windows XP   
   G > then why would you care about these issues?   
      
   Context restored at no charge.   
      
   Thanks for your help, David.   
      
      
   Apparently the DXDIAG.EXE utility is in C:/WINDOWS/System32   
   and shows that WinXP Pro SP3 x86 has 9.0c as standard.   
      
   I made the mistake before of searching for DXDIAG using the   
   built in SEARCH for files function which was not indexing   
   system and hidden files.  I'm working on that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)