Lorddiagram
Moderator
yeah - I've screwed my computer up quite a bit as well, but hey... I learned to use ol' FDISK and then reinstall WIN95.
should I partition my HD
- Thread starter Slackmaster2K
- Start date
Slackmaster2K
Gone
Dobro,
This pretty much only applies to 95/98.
If you're only using your machine for recording, then you might not notice any problems. However, using a variety of applications on Windows will generally, over time, degrade the performance of Windows.
The reasons for this are many. The operating system is a complex beast, now insert "component sharing" technologies (just think dll) and you're in for some weird shit.
Have you ever installed an application that gave you the message "The file you are copying is older than the file that already exists..."?
The main benefits of sharing code, without going into too much detail, is to provide a common interface and to reduce development time. Ever notice how 90% of the File Open boxes in your applications look the same? Do you think that everyone wrote their own File Open dialog boxes and they all magically look the same? Nope.
The bad side of this type of thing, however, is the fact that applications can "take eachother out", so to speak. I've seen IE5 completely destroy windows and an install of Office 97 completely destroy IE4. Kind of funny really.
Now underneath all that shit you have some flaws in Windows itself. Over time it just seems to grow and grow like a big tumor...and things start to slow down.
If you start noticing slowdowns or frequent crashes or even minor inconsistancies, it's typically easier to reinstall windows and all your applications, than it is to find the source of the problem. Trust me. Once you get good an install should only take an hour or two.
I was thinking about this about a month ago. I think that I've installed Windows (from versions 3.0 to NT4) approximately 200 times. Each time it's different and each time it's a big fat pain in my ass. But a fresh install of windows can be just what the doctor ordered.
Just make sure you have all the correct drivers on hand prior to reinstalling. Don't overlook anything or you could be in for a long haul.
In fact, the first thing that I like to do when I have to get a Compaq, HP, or any name-brand machine up and running is to make a driver inventory and install a fresh version of windows. There's nothing worse than the proprietary crap these vendors will include preinstalled....not to mention loads of horrible software. Not everything is MS's fault.
Shit, I've only described the tip of the iceberg. IMHO, Windows95/98 is a great operating system IF you understand and anticipate its negative side. And in my experience, a large percentage of all problems with it come from users who get happy with the ol' delete key, or don't bother to read all the little warning messages they get while installing applications.
BTW, if you DON'T notice any performance problems with windows, or an increase in the frequency with which your applications crash, then don't reinstall Windows. Don't fix what ain't broke, so to speak.
Slackmaster 2000
This pretty much only applies to 95/98.
If you're only using your machine for recording, then you might not notice any problems. However, using a variety of applications on Windows will generally, over time, degrade the performance of Windows.
The reasons for this are many. The operating system is a complex beast, now insert "component sharing" technologies (just think dll) and you're in for some weird shit.
Have you ever installed an application that gave you the message "The file you are copying is older than the file that already exists..."?
The main benefits of sharing code, without going into too much detail, is to provide a common interface and to reduce development time. Ever notice how 90% of the File Open boxes in your applications look the same? Do you think that everyone wrote their own File Open dialog boxes and they all magically look the same? Nope.
The bad side of this type of thing, however, is the fact that applications can "take eachother out", so to speak. I've seen IE5 completely destroy windows and an install of Office 97 completely destroy IE4. Kind of funny really.
Now underneath all that shit you have some flaws in Windows itself. Over time it just seems to grow and grow like a big tumor...and things start to slow down.
If you start noticing slowdowns or frequent crashes or even minor inconsistancies, it's typically easier to reinstall windows and all your applications, than it is to find the source of the problem. Trust me. Once you get good an install should only take an hour or two.
I was thinking about this about a month ago. I think that I've installed Windows (from versions 3.0 to NT4) approximately 200 times. Each time it's different and each time it's a big fat pain in my ass. But a fresh install of windows can be just what the doctor ordered.
Just make sure you have all the correct drivers on hand prior to reinstalling. Don't overlook anything or you could be in for a long haul.
In fact, the first thing that I like to do when I have to get a Compaq, HP, or any name-brand machine up and running is to make a driver inventory and install a fresh version of windows. There's nothing worse than the proprietary crap these vendors will include preinstalled....not to mention loads of horrible software. Not everything is MS's fault.
Shit, I've only described the tip of the iceberg. IMHO, Windows95/98 is a great operating system IF you understand and anticipate its negative side. And in my experience, a large percentage of all problems with it come from users who get happy with the ol' delete key, or don't bother to read all the little warning messages they get while installing applications.
BTW, if you DON'T notice any performance problems with windows, or an increase in the frequency with which your applications crash, then don't reinstall Windows. Don't fix what ain't broke, so to speak.
Slackmaster 2000
dobro
Well-known member
SM2K - thanks, that was informative and useful. Kind of embarrassing though - I'm guilty of experimenting with the delete key like you mentioned.
"There's nothing
worse than the proprietary crap these vendors will include
preinstalled....not to mention loads of horrible software."
Yup, and that's why I started deleting stuff on my HP. And now my computer takes about three times as long to shut down (insert rueful grin here). I think it might be time to start assembling drivers for a reinstallation.
"There's nothing
worse than the proprietary crap these vendors will include
preinstalled....not to mention loads of horrible software."
Yup, and that's why I started deleting stuff on my HP. And now my computer takes about three times as long to shut down (insert rueful grin here). I think it might be time to start assembling drivers for a reinstallation.
Slackmaster2K
Gone
Dobro:
With an HP machine you're in for a real treat!
First look for drivers on the HP website. But beware, often times their driver bundles will include crap that you don't want.
If you can't find specific drivers for each individual component in your machine, then it's time to rip the case off and start playing detective. HP doesn't manufacture its own hardware...it's all 3rd party. Sometimes you'll find the "real" manufacturer labeled on the cards, sometimes you won't. That's when you get to have some fun looking up FIC numbers! Yippee.
Also, make sure that you actually have a clean and installable version of Windows. If you have the Windows disk that came with the machine, and it has HP written anywhere on it...don't use it man! You'll end up reinstalling all the crap you didn't want in the first place. (Actually, I think HP just ships "safe recovery disks" which have windows and their own garbage on it) Also note that you can't install windows from a Windows upgrade disk. (BTW, never by a windows upgrade, get the full version)
Slackmaster 2000
With an HP machine you're in for a real treat!
First look for drivers on the HP website. But beware, often times their driver bundles will include crap that you don't want.
If you can't find specific drivers for each individual component in your machine, then it's time to rip the case off and start playing detective. HP doesn't manufacture its own hardware...it's all 3rd party. Sometimes you'll find the "real" manufacturer labeled on the cards, sometimes you won't. That's when you get to have some fun looking up FIC numbers! Yippee.
Also, make sure that you actually have a clean and installable version of Windows. If you have the Windows disk that came with the machine, and it has HP written anywhere on it...don't use it man! You'll end up reinstalling all the crap you didn't want in the first place. (Actually, I think HP just ships "safe recovery disks" which have windows and their own garbage on it) Also note that you can't install windows from a Windows upgrade disk. (BTW, never by a windows upgrade, get the full version)
Slackmaster 2000
sonusman
Banned
While I haven't installed windows as many times as Slackman has (that damn nickname for him again!!! I have installed some version of windows over ten times in the last 5 months. My current install of NT4 has survived about 3 months now, with little difficulty, but my current install of 95 is f*^k'ed up!!! LOL.....Tried to actually install the Alesis ADATEdit as well as keep the Yamaha soundcard, and a modem all at once!!! And without tech support from Alesis!!! Silly me. But my 95 wooo's are a different story, and a solution (namely a friend that is MS certified on all of their stuff) is in the works. Can't wait for the 2 hour wait with Alesis on the phone.
Anyway, having gone through the experience of installing often, I can assure all of you that Slackman is giving you all the straight skinny concerning Windows here. The whole 95/98 OS line has some significant "issues" (this is what MS likes to call "bugs"), especially when audio software is going to exist with internet browsers. Aside from that, 95/98 (or 96 1/2 if you like a truer name for this line of OS) does seem to take on a life of it's own concerning space on the hard drive. There are also the fragmenting issues that can really affect audio quality of .wav files. Also crash recovery is a joke in the 95/98 OS.
Slackman, you stated earlier that a blue screen on NT "is a VERY scary thing!". I have not had a blue screen on my current install, but on a couple of my first installs, I did. I found that after NT ran CHKDisk, everything came back up just fine. In fact, I have never had a NT install go bad on me at all. The only reason I have had to reinstall was because I partitioned badly for my C drive and 95 was messed up, and because I believe that the order of installing OS and Applications can really have some kind of effect on performance. It was suggested to me by a LANS manager friend of mine that if I was to run a dual boot system, I should install both OS's first, then install all App's for one OS, then the App's for the other OS. Overkill maybe?? I am not sure, but, the installs (with the exception of my 95 (b)) have been very stable and run very fast. But anyway, I guess that the point I was going to make was that when I have a crash on 95, almost always something is amiss afterwards. Sometimes it is as simple of reinstalling back over the install to get back a couple of files that seemed to disappear. Other times, it was just simpler to delete the Windows folder and reinstall. But with NT, the blue screen seems to be a blessing after a crash. Is what you meant by that comment that when you get a blue screen that something really went wrong??? And not that anything fatal has neccesarily happened??? That seems to be my experience with NT. Not that the problem will mess up the OS. It seems that NT has excellent file and crash recovery. I have never lost a file in NT yet. Not trying to make arguements here, just trying to clarify some statements from you, and mooch some of your excellent knowledge of Windows.......
I totally agree with your statement concerning device drivers and app's actually crashing the system, as opposed to the OS doing it. But if I am not mistaken, isn't it the OS's job to keep the system from getting hung when conflicts appear? Is it not also true that on 95/98 that the app's get direct hardware control, while on NT, the app's must go through the OS to gain control of hardware? I am asking because this is what I have heard from other knowledgable sources, and you are a knowledgable source also, so I am comparing here what people have to say about this. Also, is it not true that the OS will be doing things concerning hardware that happens in the "background", and that in the case of 95/98, that is really what starts the conflicts. When an app, and the OS are asking hardware to do something at the same time? I can see 95/98 being too dumb to resolve the conflict simply because they are not being asked to give access through the OS for control of the hardware. In the case of NT, it would seem that since the OS has to give this access to the app, it could keep better track of what is going on, and thus, prevent a function by the OS, or the app from happening until the conflict does not exist anymore, or, could at least priortize the conflicting requests.
I have also found that Task Manager in 95 is mostly a joke!!! It doesn't work about every 10 times to every 1 time that it does. In NT, I have only had 2 instances where Task Manager didn't respond, and this was while really trying to get the OS to crash (had 3 different graphics app's, internet browser, ICQ, Outlook Express, MS Word and Excel, had two of the graphics app's covert big files, had ICQ checking email, had Outlook Express checking email, opening webpage with IE5, opened at the same time with only 128mb of Ram). It finally crashed. Couldn't get Task Manager to work finally!!! Geez, I can't think of many instances where I would have so much going on at once. I am very mindful about closing down unused app's when attempting anything audio.
Anyway. Any insight you could give me concerning the above questions would be of great help to me.
Also, I have in my possesion Windows 2000 Release Candidate 2. I am thinking of getting my 95 install squared away, then upgrading it to 2000. My LANS friend that loaned me the disk claims that a 95 to 2000 upgrade is possible (by MS's account, not by any personal experience of his......but we know that MS will claim anything is possible with their software....hehe) Appearently, this 2000 disk is a full version, as well as an upgrade version. But who knows until I try. Anyway, my thought is that if it does work, that maybe I could upgrade 95, keep my 95 driver for the ADAT card, and get a better, more NT like OS out of the deal. My buddy seems to think that the ADAT card driver may not work after the upgrade to 2000, because there is no NT driver, and that should say something right there. I agree, but am not sure. Who knows if this would work. Maybe you do??? I know, it would be impossible to know everything about Windows (hell, MS can't seem to figure it out themselves, so how are WE supposed to!!!)
Oh by the way, I realize that upgrades are not the best way to go, but I am not sure that my 95 driver for the Alesis card would install on 2000 if I installed the full version, thus, the upgrade route. Any ideas here??? Let me know.
Ed
I have installed some version of windows over ten times in the last 5 months. My current install of NT4 has survived about 3 months now, with little difficulty, but my current install of 95 is f*^k'ed up!!! LOL.....Tried to actually install the Alesis ADATEdit as well as keep the Yamaha soundcard, and a modem all at once!!! And without tech support from Alesis!!! Silly me. But my 95 wooo's are a different story, and a solution (namely a friend that is MS certified on all of their stuff) is in the works. Can't wait for the 2 hour wait with Alesis on the phone. Anyway, having gone through the experience of installing often, I can assure all of you that Slackman is giving you all the straight skinny concerning Windows here. The whole 95/98 OS line has some significant "issues" (this is what MS likes to call "bugs"), especially when audio software is going to exist with internet browsers. Aside from that, 95/98 (or 96 1/2 if you like a truer name for this line of OS) does seem to take on a life of it's own concerning space on the hard drive. There are also the fragmenting issues that can really affect audio quality of .wav files. Also crash recovery is a joke in the 95/98 OS.
Slackman, you stated earlier that a blue screen on NT "is a VERY scary thing!". I have not had a blue screen on my current install, but on a couple of my first installs, I did. I found that after NT ran CHKDisk, everything came back up just fine. In fact, I have never had a NT install go bad on me at all. The only reason I have had to reinstall was because I partitioned badly for my C drive and 95 was messed up, and because I believe that the order of installing OS and Applications can really have some kind of effect on performance. It was suggested to me by a LANS manager friend of mine that if I was to run a dual boot system, I should install both OS's first, then install all App's for one OS, then the App's for the other OS. Overkill maybe?? I am not sure, but, the installs (with the exception of my 95 (b)) have been very stable and run very fast. But anyway, I guess that the point I was going to make was that when I have a crash on 95, almost always something is amiss afterwards. Sometimes it is as simple of reinstalling back over the install to get back a couple of files that seemed to disappear. Other times, it was just simpler to delete the Windows folder and reinstall. But with NT, the blue screen seems to be a blessing after a crash. Is what you meant by that comment that when you get a blue screen that something really went wrong??? And not that anything fatal has neccesarily happened??? That seems to be my experience with NT. Not that the problem will mess up the OS. It seems that NT has excellent file and crash recovery. I have never lost a file in NT yet. Not trying to make arguements here, just trying to clarify some statements from you, and mooch some of your excellent knowledge of Windows.......
I totally agree with your statement concerning device drivers and app's actually crashing the system, as opposed to the OS doing it. But if I am not mistaken, isn't it the OS's job to keep the system from getting hung when conflicts appear? Is it not also true that on 95/98 that the app's get direct hardware control, while on NT, the app's must go through the OS to gain control of hardware? I am asking because this is what I have heard from other knowledgable sources, and you are a knowledgable source also, so I am comparing here what people have to say about this. Also, is it not true that the OS will be doing things concerning hardware that happens in the "background", and that in the case of 95/98, that is really what starts the conflicts. When an app, and the OS are asking hardware to do something at the same time? I can see 95/98 being too dumb to resolve the conflict simply because they are not being asked to give access through the OS for control of the hardware. In the case of NT, it would seem that since the OS has to give this access to the app, it could keep better track of what is going on, and thus, prevent a function by the OS, or the app from happening until the conflict does not exist anymore, or, could at least priortize the conflicting requests.
I have also found that Task Manager in 95 is mostly a joke!!! It doesn't work about every 10 times to every 1 time that it does. In NT, I have only had 2 instances where Task Manager didn't respond, and this was while really trying to get the OS to crash (had 3 different graphics app's, internet browser, ICQ, Outlook Express, MS Word and Excel, had two of the graphics app's covert big files, had ICQ checking email, had Outlook Express checking email, opening webpage with IE5, opened at the same time with only 128mb of Ram). It finally crashed. Couldn't get Task Manager to work finally!!! Geez, I can't think of many instances where I would have so much going on at once. I am very mindful about closing down unused app's when attempting anything audio.
Anyway. Any insight you could give me concerning the above questions would be of great help to me.
Also, I have in my possesion Windows 2000 Release Candidate 2. I am thinking of getting my 95 install squared away, then upgrading it to 2000. My LANS friend that loaned me the disk claims that a 95 to 2000 upgrade is possible (by MS's account, not by any personal experience of his......but we know that MS will claim anything is possible with their software....hehe) Appearently, this 2000 disk is a full version, as well as an upgrade version. But who knows until I try. Anyway, my thought is that if it does work, that maybe I could upgrade 95, keep my 95 driver for the ADAT card, and get a better, more NT like OS out of the deal. My buddy seems to think that the ADAT card driver may not work after the upgrade to 2000, because there is no NT driver, and that should say something right there. I agree, but am not sure. Who knows if this would work. Maybe you do???
I know, it would be impossible to know everything about Windows (hell, MS can't seem to figure it out themselves, so how are WE supposed to!!!)Oh by the way, I realize that upgrades are not the best way to go, but I am not sure that my 95 driver for the Alesis card would install on 2000 if I installed the full version, thus, the upgrade route. Any ideas here??? Let me know.
Ed
Slackmaster2K
Gone
sonusman:
Whew! Where to start...
"especially when audio software is going to exist with internet browsers."
IE4 and IE5 are intrusive applications, but I'm not so sure that they'll have that much of an effect on audio applications. You're still using the same device drivers for your hardware. IE will install some additional audio and video codecs, which can be disabled via the Multimedia control. I'm not saying that IE won't make trouble for you, but I'm sure that it's possible to have it run in conjunction with your existing hardware with some work. (which you might not want to put in...don't bother on a standalone recording machine!)
"There are also the fragmenting issues that can really affect audio quality of .wav files."
You'll have fragmentation regardless of the OS. When you delete a file, the rest of the files that exist "after" that file aren't physically moved "down"...that would take forever! Now, I read that some wavs are interleved...I think it had something to do with stereo...that is, a segment of one channel is written, then a segment of another channel is written. Defragmenting in this case would ruin this and actually slow performance. Know anything about that?
"Is what you meant by that comment that when you get a blue screen that something really went wrong???"
Yeah. Blue screens in NT typically occur when there's a hardware problem. I got several blue screens just recently after installing some "iffy" memory. After I slowed it down a bit I stopped getting blue screens. This can be a scary thing, as hardware problems usually are. I guess the original context I used this example in was a bit misleading.
"But if I am not mistaken, isn't it the OS's job to keep the system from getting hung when conflicts appear?"
Well, yeah. The problem with Win95/98 is that it's still too "DOSsy". You can write code that will completely destroy the operating system and force a reboot. You can look at this as a bad idea by microsoft, or you can look at it as a good idea. In 1995 most games were written for DOS. Remember having to tell each game how your hardware was setup? I have a hinkering that DirectX also does a bit too much low level stuff which is why it's not supported on NT yet. MS has to keep everybody happy. Windows95 might not be the operating system you choose for mission critical applications, but if you're looking for versitile application support it's exactly what you need.
"Is it not also true that on 95/98 that the app's get direct hardware control, while on NT, the app's must go through the OS to gain control of hardware?"
As I stated above, this is pretty much true. But note that there IS hardware abstraction in 95/98. It's just much tighter in NT. Again, part of the blame here lies with the application developer, and part of the blame lies on MS. Developers know the score before starting an application. MS doesn't claim that 95 provides the protection of NT. Therefore developers must, to some extent, keep themselves in check.
"When an app, and the OS are asking hardware to do something at the same time?"
Well, I'm not sure that this is really where the problems lie. I think memory conflicts and applications not dying properly is more the root of the problem. Windows95 does not provide memory protection for 16 bit applications for one thing....meaning that my DOS app can do some fun stuff. I forget how it handles 32bit applications, but I know that it does provide some protection. Although, if I remember correctly, it doesn't protect itself. Weird. Another problem is that on occasion an application will die while having a resource locked. Locking the resource is a good thing....but not when the application dies. Have you ever had to reboot because your audio application crashed and you could no longer use midi devices?
"no NT driver, and that should say something right there. I agree, but am not sure. Who knows if this would work. Maybe you do???"
In regards to Windows 2000. Initially it was basically NT5. Then I read that they decided to scale it back a bit and not use the full NT kernel. I'm not sure what ever happened. I think my buddy out in Seattle is running the final release candidate of 2000 (he works closely with MS). I'll have to ask.
Anyway, if there is no 2000 support for your hardware, it's probably your hardware manufacturer's fault. Really. And I'm not sure that an NT4 driver will work with Windows 2000. I'm hoping that 2000 will have the driver support that 98 included. Impressive!
Just wait, you'll see 2000 drivers popping up soon enough. Remember, the OS isn't even out yet so don't expect to see drivers until it is. And I'm not sure that NT4 drivers will work in 2000 anyway.
DO NOT UPGRADE WINDOWS EVER. There is so much CRAP in your Windows folder...too much for any upgrade routine to effectively manage. That is, you'll upgrade to 2000 and have a bunch of garbage left over from 95. Remember upgrading from 3.1 to 95? What a mess. Even if they claim it works great, you might as well do a fresh install since you're used to it already anyway.
Anyway, you want to know what the big problem is with Windows 95? Well, it's not really a problem so much....BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY. People scream bloody murder when their applications don't work on the latest operating system. Enter Windows 95, capable of running DOS and Win32 applications simultaneously. A good move or a bad move on the part of MS? Seeing as how NT was already an alternative, I'd say it was a pretty good move.
Hmmm. I have a bad feeling about this message. I'm NOT a windows expert. I know what I need to know to get the job done. My brain is trying to stretch back to those operating system classes in college but it's not working. I'm a software developer/network admin/butt-wiper. It would be nice to know the ins and outs of every operating system but I don't. Over the years I've learned quite a bit and forgotten most of it. What's left are impressions that allow me to make educated guesses and to use the proper applications to implement a workable solution.
There's a LOT of bullsh*t out there. There are a lot of people just like me spewing what they think they know...and people will believe them because of their title. And then people who really have no idea what's going on will misinterpret that and spread even stranger rumors.
Crap, I better get back to work!
Slackmaster 2000
Whew! Where to start...
"especially when audio software is going to exist with internet browsers."
IE4 and IE5 are intrusive applications, but I'm not so sure that they'll have that much of an effect on audio applications. You're still using the same device drivers for your hardware. IE will install some additional audio and video codecs, which can be disabled via the Multimedia control. I'm not saying that IE won't make trouble for you, but I'm sure that it's possible to have it run in conjunction with your existing hardware with some work. (which you might not want to put in...don't bother on a standalone recording machine!)
"There are also the fragmenting issues that can really affect audio quality of .wav files."
You'll have fragmentation regardless of the OS. When you delete a file, the rest of the files that exist "after" that file aren't physically moved "down"...that would take forever! Now, I read that some wavs are interleved...I think it had something to do with stereo...that is, a segment of one channel is written, then a segment of another channel is written. Defragmenting in this case would ruin this and actually slow performance. Know anything about that?
"Is what you meant by that comment that when you get a blue screen that something really went wrong???"
Yeah. Blue screens in NT typically occur when there's a hardware problem. I got several blue screens just recently after installing some "iffy" memory. After I slowed it down a bit I stopped getting blue screens. This can be a scary thing, as hardware problems usually are. I guess the original context I used this example in was a bit misleading.
"But if I am not mistaken, isn't it the OS's job to keep the system from getting hung when conflicts appear?"
Well, yeah. The problem with Win95/98 is that it's still too "DOSsy". You can write code that will completely destroy the operating system and force a reboot. You can look at this as a bad idea by microsoft, or you can look at it as a good idea. In 1995 most games were written for DOS. Remember having to tell each game how your hardware was setup? I have a hinkering that DirectX also does a bit too much low level stuff which is why it's not supported on NT yet. MS has to keep everybody happy. Windows95 might not be the operating system you choose for mission critical applications, but if you're looking for versitile application support it's exactly what you need.
"Is it not also true that on 95/98 that the app's get direct hardware control, while on NT, the app's must go through the OS to gain control of hardware?"
As I stated above, this is pretty much true. But note that there IS hardware abstraction in 95/98. It's just much tighter in NT. Again, part of the blame here lies with the application developer, and part of the blame lies on MS. Developers know the score before starting an application. MS doesn't claim that 95 provides the protection of NT. Therefore developers must, to some extent, keep themselves in check.
"When an app, and the OS are asking hardware to do something at the same time?"
Well, I'm not sure that this is really where the problems lie. I think memory conflicts and applications not dying properly is more the root of the problem. Windows95 does not provide memory protection for 16 bit applications for one thing....meaning that my DOS app can do some fun stuff. I forget how it handles 32bit applications, but I know that it does provide some protection. Although, if I remember correctly, it doesn't protect itself. Weird. Another problem is that on occasion an application will die while having a resource locked. Locking the resource is a good thing....but not when the application dies. Have you ever had to reboot because your audio application crashed and you could no longer use midi devices?
"no NT driver, and that should say something right there. I agree, but am not sure. Who knows if this would work. Maybe you do???"
In regards to Windows 2000. Initially it was basically NT5. Then I read that they decided to scale it back a bit and not use the full NT kernel. I'm not sure what ever happened. I think my buddy out in Seattle is running the final release candidate of 2000 (he works closely with MS). I'll have to ask.
Anyway, if there is no 2000 support for your hardware, it's probably your hardware manufacturer's fault. Really. And I'm not sure that an NT4 driver will work with Windows 2000. I'm hoping that 2000 will have the driver support that 98 included. Impressive!
Just wait, you'll see 2000 drivers popping up soon enough. Remember, the OS isn't even out yet so don't expect to see drivers until it is. And I'm not sure that NT4 drivers will work in 2000 anyway.
DO NOT UPGRADE WINDOWS EVER. There is so much CRAP in your Windows folder...too much for any upgrade routine to effectively manage. That is, you'll upgrade to 2000 and have a bunch of garbage left over from 95. Remember upgrading from 3.1 to 95? What a mess. Even if they claim it works great, you might as well do a fresh install since you're used to it already anyway.
Anyway, you want to know what the big problem is with Windows 95? Well, it's not really a problem so much....BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY. People scream bloody murder when their applications don't work on the latest operating system. Enter Windows 95, capable of running DOS and Win32 applications simultaneously. A good move or a bad move on the part of MS? Seeing as how NT was already an alternative, I'd say it was a pretty good move.
Hmmm. I have a bad feeling about this message. I'm NOT a windows expert. I know what I need to know to get the job done. My brain is trying to stretch back to those operating system classes in college but it's not working. I'm a software developer/network admin/butt-wiper. It would be nice to know the ins and outs of every operating system but I don't. Over the years I've learned quite a bit and forgotten most of it. What's left are impressions that allow me to make educated guesses and to use the proper applications to implement a workable solution.
There's a LOT of bullsh*t out there. There are a lot of people just like me spewing what they think they know...and people will believe them because of their title. And then people who really have no idea what's going on will misinterpret that and spread even stranger rumors.
Crap, I better get back to work!
Slackmaster 2000
Slackmaster2K
Gone
ametth:
See my response to sonusman about the drivers.
As far as removing IE from Windows98...well, the answer is yes and no. Apparently some professor at some univeristy wrote a program that would remove all references to Internet Exploder from Win98, and Win98 still worked. This was used against Microsoft during that anti-trust suit. Microsoft was claiming that IE was an integral part of the operating system.
In short, no you can't remove IE unless you're a college professor with a whole lotta time
Removing IE from Windows98 would leave you with Windows95. Heh. Really, just about everything included with Windows98 was available, for free, in the last release of Windows95 (+ some updates). That's not to say that there aren't any other changes to Win98, but as far as joe blow is concerned....
Slackmaster 2000
See my response to sonusman about the drivers.
As far as removing IE from Windows98...well, the answer is yes and no. Apparently some professor at some univeristy wrote a program that would remove all references to Internet Exploder from Win98, and Win98 still worked. This was used against Microsoft during that anti-trust suit. Microsoft was claiming that IE was an integral part of the operating system.
In short, no you can't remove IE unless you're a college professor with a whole lotta time
Removing IE from Windows98 would leave you with Windows95. Heh. Really, just about everything included with Windows98 was available, for free, in the last release of Windows95 (+ some updates). That's not to say that there aren't any other changes to Win98, but as far as joe blow is concerned....
Slackmaster 2000
loudnaybor
New member
GOD am I glad I bought an ADAT !!!!!
Greetings from Oz,
While not wanting to get into the partitioning discussion (a lot of good advice there) I did want to make a comment regarding the stability of Win95. I run a K6-2 400 with 196mb ram and a Quantum 10.2 HDD to convert my vinyl to CD (my swapfile size is 0k by the way). Not as adventurous as you guys but it's a job that needs doing !
Anyway I started my Win95 install with the last 'official' cut from Bill; OSR2.5 (I think, the one that comes with USB support). Then since the install, about every month or so I use the Windows Update feature to keep my Win95 OS current (bug fixes, enchancements etc). Although Win98 is the current OS, Bill is still publishing updates/fixes for Win95. Granted most of these are for Office or IE, but on checking what updates are actually installed, using QFECHECK, I have noticed quite a few 'patches' to Win 95 itself.
I also checkout my hardware vendors' web pages for updated drivers etc (using out of date or beta drivers is more risky than a dodgy OS). Using this method I have not had any lock-ups, page faults, GPF's etc. My machine is running 24hrs a day (when I'm not using it it's running that SETI pgm looking for ET!). The point I think I'm making is keep your OS current, what ever flavour it is, and you should keep outta trouble. It's been 65 odd days since a re-boot and not one glitch.
One last place you could check out is the Microsoft FTP library at ftp.microsoft.com/Softlib/Mslfiles. It keeps all patches and updates for all versions of Windows.
But one drawback is if you ever need to rebuild your OS, getting the patches back is one helluva pain in the butt so make sure you save the updates/patches to a zip disk or something !
I can't warrant that if you pursue this you won't ever have another problem, but so for it's worked for me.
Finally, once you have your system set up and running as you want, DON'T FIDDLE with it, just use it!
Hope this helps..
Cheers.
While not wanting to get into the partitioning discussion (a lot of good advice there) I did want to make a comment regarding the stability of Win95. I run a K6-2 400 with 196mb ram and a Quantum 10.2 HDD to convert my vinyl to CD (my swapfile size is 0k by the way). Not as adventurous as you guys but it's a job that needs doing !
Anyway I started my Win95 install with the last 'official' cut from Bill; OSR2.5 (I think, the one that comes with USB support). Then since the install, about every month or so I use the Windows Update feature to keep my Win95 OS current (bug fixes, enchancements etc). Although Win98 is the current OS, Bill is still publishing updates/fixes for Win95. Granted most of these are for Office or IE, but on checking what updates are actually installed, using QFECHECK, I have noticed quite a few 'patches' to Win 95 itself.
I also checkout my hardware vendors' web pages for updated drivers etc (using out of date or beta drivers is more risky than a dodgy OS). Using this method I have not had any lock-ups, page faults, GPF's etc. My machine is running 24hrs a day (when I'm not using it it's running that SETI pgm looking for ET!). The point I think I'm making is keep your OS current, what ever flavour it is, and you should keep outta trouble. It's been 65 odd days since a re-boot and not one glitch.
One last place you could check out is the Microsoft FTP library at ftp.microsoft.com/Softlib/Mslfiles. It keeps all patches and updates for all versions of Windows.
But one drawback is if you ever need to rebuild your OS, getting the patches back is one helluva pain in the butt so make sure you save the updates/patches to a zip disk or something !
I can't warrant that if you pursue this you won't ever have another problem, but so for it's worked for me.
Finally, once you have your system set up and running as you want, DON'T FIDDLE with it, just use it!
Hope this helps..
Cheers.
being a reluctant "computer guy", i had to add my two bits. being so tied up with crashed nt servers i've very little time to experiment with beta systems. the other day i had a guy with 2000 beta (i think 3)and e-mail trouble. i took a quick look at his system and knew we're in for trouble. ms seems to have added a hundred new services that are nazi-ing out. i tried to remove tcpip and got an "cannot stop security service" error. SERCURITY SERVICE FOR A PROTOCOL! it's not rocket science. add it, remove it, add it, remove it, add it... it should be simple. ms seems to be so wrapped up in security that they're going to let it interfere with day to day operations. i am not a fan of nt nor ms. like mac they are trying to take too much control of what's going on in your system. (having started out with dos version 3 I like to be control of my system)As a server, NT is vastly inferior to novell and i cringe whenever i have to work on an nt workstation. all too often i've come up against "the blue screen of death" which gives you a completely incomprehensible readout of hexadecimal notation and then proceeds to do a memory dump. this all leads toward a re-installation.
the theory behind nt is ms saying "let us handle your system" one of the latest things i've seen with ie 5 is the constant "updates" that it tries to perform. as mentioned in an earlier post, once you have a working stable system you should refrain from updating. updating just for the sake of updating is a tool-based approach to computer management. it does not consider your real business needs (i.e. recording) time after time i've had to deal with screaming execs who can't restart their machine because they put in some patch that was supposed to fix some obsure reporting function on a program they never use. ("it said to apply the patch!")
nt, mac, os2, linux? i'll tell you the answer i give to all of my clients "THIS IS ALL NEW TECHNOLOGY AND WILL NEVER WORK AS THEY CLAIM". If you realize this, you'll be less frustrated in the future.
happy motoring,
stax
the theory behind nt is ms saying "let us handle your system" one of the latest things i've seen with ie 5 is the constant "updates" that it tries to perform. as mentioned in an earlier post, once you have a working stable system you should refrain from updating. updating just for the sake of updating is a tool-based approach to computer management. it does not consider your real business needs (i.e. recording) time after time i've had to deal with screaming execs who can't restart their machine because they put in some patch that was supposed to fix some obsure reporting function on a program they never use. ("it said to apply the patch!")
nt, mac, os2, linux? i'll tell you the answer i give to all of my clients "THIS IS ALL NEW TECHNOLOGY AND WILL NEVER WORK AS THEY CLAIM". If you realize this, you'll be less frustrated in the future.
happy motoring,
stax