Screen freeze while copyng large group of files [Archive]

February 14th 06, 12:17 AM

Shane wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>
>>Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data files
>>from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts copying, then
>>freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has happened several times,
>>no problem on smaller groups of files, just large ones.
>>
>>This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>
>>Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>>
>
>
> Yes. The way to get round it is copy, delete (or whatever) chunks rather
> than the whole lot at once. Also, there is probably no absolute need to
> reboot, eventually it'd start going again - but none of us wants to sit
> around for long periods waiting, do we.
>
> Shane
>
>

Do you mean- Yes, it's due to ME?

Because it doesn't happen in W98SE

MS

Noel Paton

February 14th 06, 12:58 AM

"ms" > wrote in message
...
> Shane wrote:
>> "ms" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>>
>>>Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data files
>>>from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts copying,
>>>then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has happened several
>>>times, no problem on smaller groups of files, just large ones.
>>>
>>>This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>>
>>>Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes. The way to get round it is copy, delete (or whatever) chunks rather
>> than the whole lot at once. Also, there is probably no absolute need to
>> reboot, eventually it'd start going again - but none of us wants to sit
>> around for long periods waiting, do we.
>>
>> Shane
>
> Do you mean- Yes, it's due to ME?
>
> Because it doesn't happen in W98SE
>

I appears to be more due to IE6 than to ME - it DOES happen in Win98, but
only when IE6 is installed

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

Shane

February 14th 06, 01:41 AM

Noel Paton wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Shane wrote:
>>> "ms" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>>>
>>>> Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data
>>>> files from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts
>>>> copying, then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has
>>>> happened several times, no problem on smaller groups of files,
>>>> just large ones.
>>>>
>>>> This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>>>
>>>> Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes. The way to get round it is copy, delete (or whatever) chunks
>>> rather than the whole lot at once. Also, there is probably no
>>> absolute need to reboot, eventually it'd start going again - but
>>> none of us wants to sit around for long periods waiting, do we.
>>>
>>> Shane
>>
>> Do you mean- Yes, it's due to ME?
>>
>> Because it doesn't happen in W98SE
>>
>
> I appears to be more due to IE6 than to ME - it DOES happen in Win98,
> but only when IE6 is installed

That seems to ring a bell, Noel - the IE6 involvement, that is - however, I
must say I use exactly the same build in 98SE and while there is a delay
(that I'm sure wasn't always there!) I don't get any 'sitting around for
long periods waiting' like I do in ME. Not to the point of where it to all
intents and purposes has hung.

What I get in 98SE is a relatively long time to connect to the 'net.

Shane

Shane

February 14th 06, 01:59 AM

ms wrote:
> Shane wrote:
>> "ms" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>>
>>> Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data
>>> files from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts
>>> copying, then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has
>>> happened several times, no problem on smaller groups of files, just
>>> large ones.
>>>
>>> This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>>
>>> Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes. The way to get round it is copy, delete (or whatever) chunks
>> rather than the whole lot at once. Also, there is probably no
>> absolute need to reboot, eventually it'd start going again - but
>> none of us wants to sit around for long periods waiting, do we.
>>
>> Shane
>>
>>
>
> Do you mean- Yes, it's due to ME?
>
> Because it doesn't happen in W98SE
>

Yes. Are you asking which of your questions I'm answering? <g> Please, don't
play with my head when I can hardly keep my eyes open!

I certainly wouldn't rule out the root cause being IE6, as Noel says, but
I'd say in that case that it's an interaction. It's a long time since I ran
ME without IE6 and I don't really remember what it was like, but with IE6 ME
is much worse in this respect in my experience than is 98SE with IE6.
Perhaps it's due to the deeper integration of IE in ME, thus the system is
more sensitive to problems introduced with it.

I personally don't think it really matters, that in almost every way ME is
superior to 98SE and taking the precautions I mentioned for bulk file
operations is a small price to pay for that. Be nice if it was perfect, but
who are we kidding, eh?

Shane

February 14th 06, 02:32 PM

Shane wrote:
> ms wrote:
>
>>Shane wrote:
>>
>>>"ms" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>>>
>>>>Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data
>>>>files from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts
>>>>copying, then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has
>>>>happened several times, no problem on smaller groups of files, just
>>>>large ones.
>>>>
>>>>This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>>>
>>>>Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes. The way to get round it is copy, delete (or whatever) chunks
>>>rather than the whole lot at once. Also, there is probably no
>>>absolute need to reboot, eventually it'd start going again - but
>>>none of us wants to sit around for long periods waiting, do we.
>>>
>>>Shane
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Do you mean- Yes, it's due to ME?
>>
>>Because it doesn't happen in W98SE
>>
>
>
> Yes. Are you asking which of your questions I'm answering? <g> Please, don't
> play with my head when I can hardly keep my eyes open!
>
> I certainly wouldn't rule out the root cause being IE6, as Noel says, but
> I'd say in that case that it's an interaction. It's a long time since I ran
> ME without IE6 and I don't really remember what it was like, but with IE6 ME
> is much worse in this respect in my experience than is 98SE with IE6.
> Perhaps it's due to the deeper integration of IE in ME, thus the system is
> more sensitive to problems introduced with it.
>
> I personally don't think it really matters, that in almost every way ME is
> superior to 98SE and taking the precautions I mentioned for bulk file
> operations is a small price to pay for that. Be nice if it was perfect, but
> who are we kidding, eh?
>
> Shane
>
>

Thanks for the info.

My ME computer haa IE 5.5, in my W98SE computer (where I know the history) I
installed IE 5.01SP2, it later reported IE 5.5 installed, I dunno. In any event,
neither has IE 6.

I'm new to this ng so please explain:
" that in almost every way ME is
> superior to 98SE"

MS

Rick Chauvin

February 14th 06, 09:24 PM

"ms" > wrote in message

> Thanks for the info.
>
> My ME computer haa IE 5.5, in my W98SE computer (where I know the
> history) I installed IE 5.01SP2, it later reported IE 5.5 installed, I
> dunno. In any event, neither has IE 6.

IE5 and W9x are not affected by the delete/copy hang issue which is another
subject not to be confused with this thread, and since you have IE5 it is not
your problem; however if interested you can read about the W9x IE6x issue here:
http://tinyurl.com/dxlf2

The My Documents folder that was mentioned to you in the W98 forum is a
different issue too which is related to slow opening folders, but that does not
apply to your specific problem either, however as always if you have more than
a total of 100 folders/subfolders within it then it's recommended to remove
them elsewhere and keep that folder under 75.

> I'm new to this ng so please explain:
> " that in almost every way ME is
> > superior to 98SE"

imho, saying WME is superior is only a personal opinion and not a world widely
held truth; but I certainly respect those that feel ME is superior and I won't
debate the issue. There have been countless threads and discussion back and
forth about this over the years with the pro's and con's of each, and each side
had some good reading. I like WME and always have respected its effort and
release, but I personally prefer W98SE over ME though, and anytime I've
ever used ME for my own use I certainly shut off System Restore and File
Protection for my own reasons which simply were I always insist on using Backup
Partition Imaging software for comprehensive restoring control rather than SR
or anything else for that matter ..but that's just my preference, but again I
respect those that like to use SR. I do the same thing on WXP is to turn off
its Restore feature.

I had once saved a (by now older) website article about others not liking WME
very much, and will post that article just for general purpose only; but again
I am not going to debate the issue on way or the other.
http://tinyurl.com/e4j6c

Rick

>
> MS

Shane

February 14th 06, 10:24 PM

> imho, saying WME is superior is only a personal opinion and not a world
> widely
> held truth;

Bear in mind that I prefaced the statement with "I personally don't think it
really matters", the idea being that everything following it *within that
sentence* was a personal opinion. Actually I find it difficult to see how it
could be logically interpreted any other way, but know that there is
surprisingly little understanding of logic within the IT community, so
understand there will be those who doubt my own understanding of it.

> but I certainly respect those that feel ME is superior and I won't
> debate the issue. There have been countless threads and discussion back
> and
> forth about this over the years with the pro's and con's of each, and each
> side
> had some good reading. I like WME and always have respected its effort
> and
> release, but I personally prefer W98SE over ME though, and anytime I've
> ever used ME for my own use I certainly shut off System Restore and File
> Protection for my own reasons which simply were I always insist on using
> Backup
> Partition Imaging software for comprehensive restoring control rather than
> SR
> or anything else for that matter ..but that's just my preference, but
> again I
> respect those that like to use SR. I do the same thing on WXP is to turn
> off
> its Restore feature.

I almost never use SR, but I'd rather use it to reverse a single file
corruption than restore the entire drive with an image approaching one week
old. And that is, I feel, the only real point of SR. There are various
practical reasons not to be continually backing up.

>
> I had once saved a (by now older) website article about others not liking
> WME
> very much, and will post that article just for general purpose only; but
> again
> I am not going to debate the issue on way or the other.
> http://tinyurl.com/e4j6c
>

Nor I. I think that those who prefer whichever system almost always do so
because that was the system current when they hit the high-point of their
appreciation of the technology, thus they in effect 'bonded' with that
particular system.

This is mankind. We grow older and dislike new fashion, attitudes,
technology - we want the world to remain exactly as it was when we were in
our prime (teenage years and twenties?). Another way to put it is we grow
more conservative as we get older - which I think equates to how in our
youth we're compelled to take risk but as we age the compulsion is to keep
what we've achieved, ie play it safe. I believe this phenomenon accounts for
the majority of stated preferences in Operating Systems and - even if there
is more practicality involved in such than I appreciate - it is nonetheless
a dominant trait in our species.

It may be something so banal as evolution having no further use for us. In
respect to the Windows-98-being-superior-to-ME diatribes I've witnessed
since 2000, very, very few have been anything but unadulterated emotion,
launched by people clearly afraid of losing touch with a discipline they
finally felt they'd grasped.

This isn't a thinly-veiled attack, btw, Rick. You sound to me like one of
the few capable of rational analysis. Just most of the others don't.

Shane

Rick Chauvin

February 14th 06, 11:18 PM

"Shane" > wrote in message

>> imho, saying WME is superior is only a personal opinion and not a world
>> widely held truth;
>
> Bear in mind that I prefaced the statement with "I personally don't
> think it really matters", the idea being that everything following it
> *within that sentence* was a personal opinion. Actually I find it
> difficult to see how it could be logically interpreted any other way,

Maybe I'm getting old too :) ..unfortunately I think I gots as many gray
hairs as the rest of you ):

>>I personally don't think it really matters, that in almost every way ME
>>is superior to 98SE and taking the precautions I mentioned for bulk file
>>operations is a small price to pay for that. Be nice if it was perfect,
>>but who are we kidding, eh?

I guess I took it the way ms did though, and was just responding to him
about his take. It's not a big deal really.

> but know that there is surprisingly little understanding of logic within
> the IT community, so understand there will be those who doubt my own
> understanding of it.

heh, well we all try to be 'at one' in understanding though.

> I almost never use SR, but I'd rather use it to reverse a single file
> corruption than restore the entire drive with an image approaching one
> week old. And that is, I feel, the only real point of SR. There are
> various practical reasons not to be continually backing up.

Understood, but then again with instant single file restore from the modern
day imagers I'd still leave SR off.

> Nor I. I think that those who prefer whichever system almost always do so
> because that was the system current when they hit the high-point of their
> appreciation of the technology, thus they in effect 'bonded' with that
> particular system.

Understood for the average user, although hopefully for techs they use all
the OS's and so in that wide experience they know and bond to all of them
being objective about each and see them as they are without being
emotionally attached; although, you're right we do tend to lean towards
certain ones at different times - at least, come to think about it, I have
if I'm being honest with myself. I still have the same wife though after
all these years <g>

> This is mankind. We grow older and dislike new fashion, attitudes,
> technology - we want the world to remain exactly as it was when we were
> in our prime (teenage years and twenties?). Another way to put it is we
> grow more conservative as we get older - which I think equates to how in
> our youth we're compelled to take risk but as we age the compulsion is
> to keep what we've achieved, ie play it safe. I believe this phenomenon
> accounts for the majority of stated preferences in Operating Systems and
> - even if there is more practicality involved in such than I appreciate
> - it is nonetheless a dominant trait in our species.

I understand your point - you are quite the philosopher too :)

> It may be something so banal as evolution having no further use for us.
> In respect to the Windows-98-being-superior-to-ME diatribes I've
> witnessed since 2000, very, very few have been anything but
> unadulterated emotion, launched by people clearly afraid of losing touch
> with a discipline they finally felt they'd grasped.

hehe, well I have high hopes for mankind.
I like to focus on a positive outlook on everything, but realize the points
you are making, and must admit see them around often.

> This isn't a thinly-veiled attack, btw, Rick. You sound to me like one of
> the few capable of rational analysis. Just most of the others don't.

Understood. My flow of life has always been to get to the facts and truth
about things, especially about philosophy and electronics, and I don't fret
too much if I am right or wrong in the first place since my goal is always
the truth beyond all emotion, at least I try <bg>

take care,
Rick

sorry for the snips of my text but your indents of my linewraps were off,
and so you must not be using OEQuotefix I guess.

>
> Shane

February 15th 06, 02:01 PM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>>Thanks for the info.
>>
>>My ME computer haa IE 5.5, in my W98SE computer (where I know the
>>history) I installed IE 5.01SP2, it later reported IE 5.5 installed, I
>>dunno. In any event, neither has IE 6.
>
>
> IE5 and W9x are not affected by the delete/copy hang issue which is another
> subject not to be confused with this thread, and since you have IE5 it is not
> your problem; however if interested you can read about the W9x IE6x issue here:
> http://tinyurl.com/dxlf2
>
> The My Documents folder that was mentioned to you in the W98 forum is a
> different issue too which is related to slow opening folders, but that does not
> apply to your specific problem either, however as always if you have more than
> a total of 100 folders/subfolders within it then it's recommended to remove
> them elsewhere and keep that folder under 75.
>
>
>>I'm new to this ng so please explain:
>>" that in almost every way ME is
>> > superior to 98SE"
>
>
> imho, saying WME is superior is only a personal opinion and not a world widely
> held truth; but I certainly respect those that feel ME is superior and I won't
> debate the issue. There have been countless threads and discussion back and
> forth about this over the years with the pro's and con's of each, and each side
> had some good reading. I like WME and always have respected its effort and
> release, but I personally prefer W98SE over ME though, and anytime I've
> ever used ME for my own use I certainly shut off System Restore and File
> Protection for my own reasons which simply were I always insist on using Backup
> Partition Imaging software for comprehensive restoring control rather than SR
> or anything else for that matter ..but that's just my preference, but again I
> respect those that like to use SR. I do the same thing on WXP is to turn off
> its Restore feature.
>
> I had once saved a (by now older) website article about others not liking WME
> very much, and will post that article just for general purpose only; but again
> I am not going to debate the issue on way or the other.
> http://tinyurl.com/e4j6c
>
> Rick

Thanks for the data, Rick.

The webpage at that link is strange. It looks (Firefox here) like a html page with
all the code showing and it saves as a text file. I hope I can salvage the text in
it.

Comment?

MS

Rick Chauvin

February 15th 06, 08:42 PM

"ms" > wrote in message

> Thanks for the data, Rick.
>
> The webpage at that link is strange. It looks (Firefox here) like a html
> page with all the code showing and it saves as a text file. I hope I can
> salvage the text in it.

Before I get to the mht extensions answer I see in my wme folder I had
another article which I should of posted first which was a prelude to the
second one.

WindowsME informational articles - winmag.com (August 2000)
http://tinyurl.com/cdn34
&
What's Wrong With Windows ME article recap - winmag.com (March 2001)
http://tinyurl.com/e4j6c

>
> Comment?

Okay, I originally saved each set of original webpages as a single mht
extension webpage file back in 2002. mht extension files are really Very
useful when saving webpages for numerous reasons, and I have always used
them, and as well when I can, I will take the whole article even if it's 18
pages long as one of them was, and save them as a printable style (no ads,
etc) ..and save it all as 'one' viewable allinone webpage viewable
offline - and that's what I did here and am friendly and temporally serving
the files off my website just for this post - by all means save them to
your own computer to keep.

Firefox however won't render them unless you install the plugin for it
which you can download that plugin here:
http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/01/display-microsoft-mht-files-in-firefox.html

If you don't want to bother with a plugin for Firefox then here's the
original article from where I got it which amazingly I see it's still up,
but you will have to click though the 'Next' button at the bottom of each
page to be able to read each successive page to the articles, whereas as
the mht's files I did are 1 file each containing All the pages within its
articles in one with no advertisements etc.. and you can read it all
offline anytime you want. Anyway, the original links are:

WindowsME - winmag.com (August 2000)
http://www.winmag.com/windows/winme/final/default.htm
&
What's Wrong With Windows ME - winmag.com (March 2001)
http://www.winmag.com/windows/winme/longterm/default.htm

In perspective though realize I'm just posting these as an old fyi about
someone else's articles - not mine. Also keep in mind that these articles
are 5 years old and so some things have now been superceded like WMP9 for
WMP7 and IE6 for IE5, etc.. and who knows what else has changed for the
good - which hopefully all of it did.

Also please understand just because I have pointed out these articles, does
not mean I am against WME in any way, thank you. WME is a fine OS.

Rick

>
> MS

Rick Chauvin

February 15th 06, 08:49 PM

"ms" > wrote in message

> This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>
> Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data files

As compared to what I originally thought you meant in the W98 forum
copying large quanties of files you meant 100's of MB's - but are
you actually saying here that you are copying only 10 files of which all of
them only equaling only 2 or 4 MB? ..even if you meant 10x 2-4mb that
only equals 20-40 MB and that is Not a large group at all and really
is an easy piece of cake and should copy in just seconds.

> from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts copying,
> then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has happened several
> times, no problem on smaller groups of files, just large ones.

As I eluded to in the W98 forum - Does this happen when copying only from
the CD or can you copy files from one folder to another on your HD
without a problem - or is it just that CD or any CD? If it's just the CD
it may mean something as simple as one of your computers cdrom's maybe
reads the cd just fine, but your other computer having a entirely different
cdrom that may have problems reading the CD in question and hang on that
particular portion of files you are copying, etc.. or it could be something
else but without you giving more specific info on variations of what you've
done testing we can only speculate with the little info you've given so
far, thank you.

> This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>
> Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?

WME or any computer should have no problem with copying 10 little files
only equaling 40 MB of data - it's a blink of an eye easy!
(you really meant 10 files all only equalling 40MB right?)

Please test it again giving more and specific information on different
variations of what you are copying, and by all means also copy it from the
HD folder to folder too and not just the CD - and by doing so we can get a
more detailed and clearer picture of the problem.

Thank you,

Rick

>
> TIA
>
> MS

Shane

February 16th 06, 10:53 AM

"Rick Chauvin" > wrote in message
...
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>> This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>
>> Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data files
>
> As compared to what I originally thought you meant in the W98 forum
> copying large quanties of files you meant 100's of MB's - but are
> you actually saying here that you are copying only 10 files of which all
> of
> them only equaling only 2 or 4 MB? ..even if you meant 10x 2-4mb that
> only equals 20-40 MB and that is Not a large group at all and really
> is an easy piece of cake and should copy in just seconds.
>

Ah. Yes. Not the issue I was addressing at all, that involves ca. 500 +
files.

Shane

February 16th 06, 04:22 PM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>>This is a Dell 700 MHZ with a Celeron chipset, 128 MB RAM and ME.
>>
>>Offline, when I copy a large group (10 files each 2-4 MB) of data files
>
>
> As compared to what I originally thought you meant in the W98 forum
> copying large quanties of files you meant 100's of MB's - but are
> you actually saying here that you are copying only 10 files of which all of
> them only equaling only 2 or 4 MB? ..even if you meant 10x 2-4mb that
> only equals 20-40 MB and that is Not a large group at all and really
> is an easy piece of cake and should copy in just seconds.
>
>
>>from a CD to a folder on the hard drive, the computer starts copying,
>>then freezes, have to shut off and cold boot. This has happened several
>>times, no problem on smaller groups of files, just large ones.
>
>
> As I eluded to in the W98 forum - Does this happen when copying only from
> the CD or can you copy files from one folder to another on your HD
> without a problem - or is it just that CD or any CD? If it's just the CD
> it may mean something as simple as one of your computers cdrom's maybe
> reads the cd just fine, but your other computer having a entirely different
> cdrom that may have problems reading the CD in question and hang on that
> particular portion of files you are copying, etc.. or it could be something
> else but without you giving more specific info on variations of what you've
> done testing we can only speculate with the little info you've given so
> far, thank you.
>
>
>>This does not happen on my slower W98SE computer with less RAM.
>>
>>Is this likely caused by the Windows ME OS?
>
>
> WME or any computer should have no problem with copying 10 little files
> only equaling 40 MB of data - it's a blink of an eye easy!
> (you really meant 10 files all only equalling 40MB right?)
>
> Please test it again giving more and specific information on different
> variations of what you are copying, and by all means also copy it from the
> HD folder to folder too and not just the CD - and by doing so we can get a
> more detailed and clearer picture of the problem.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Rick
>
>
>>TIA
>>
>>MS
>

Yes, it was just copying from the CD (writen on my P166) to the hard drive folder
on my Dell with ME. Too many other things going on now, so I will live with it. At
least, now I better understand it.

Thanks for the info, Rick.

MS

February 16th 06, 04:23 PM

February 16th 06, 04:26 PM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>
>>Thanks for the data, Rick.
>>
>>The webpage at that link is strange. It looks (Firefox here) like a html
>>page with all the code showing and it saves as a text file. I hope I can
>>salvage the text in it.
>
>
> Before I get to the mht extensions answer I see in my wme folder I had
> another article which I should of posted first which was a prelude to the
> second one.
>
> WindowsME informational articles - winmag.com (August 2000)
> http://tinyurl.com/cdn34
> &
> What's Wrong With Windows ME article recap - winmag.com (March 2001)
> http://tinyurl.com/e4j6c
>
>
>>Comment?
>
>
> Okay, I originally saved each set of original webpages as a single mht
> extension webpage file back in 2002. mht extension files are really Very
> useful when saving webpages for numerous reasons, and I have always used
> them, and as well when I can, I will take the whole article even if it's 18
> pages long as one of them was, and save them as a printable style (no ads,
> etc) ..and save it all as 'one' viewable allinone webpage viewable
> offline - and that's what I did here and am friendly and temporally serving
> the files off my website just for this post - by all means save them to
> your own computer to keep.
>
> Firefox however won't render them unless you install the plugin for it
> which you can download that plugin here:
> http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/01/display-microsoft-mht-files-in-firefox.html
>
> If you don't want to bother with a plugin for Firefox then here's the
> original article from where I got it which amazingly I see it's still up,
> but you will have to click though the 'Next' button at the bottom of each
> page to be able to read each successive page to the articles, whereas as
> the mht's files I did are 1 file each containing All the pages within its
> articles in one with no advertisements etc.. and you can read it all
> offline anytime you want. Anyway, the original links are:
>
> WindowsME - winmag.com (August 2000)
> http://www.winmag.com/windows/winme/final/default.htm
> &
> What's Wrong With Windows ME - winmag.com (March 2001)
> http://www.winmag.com/windows/winme/longterm/default.htm
>
> In perspective though realize I'm just posting these as an old fyi about
> someone else's articles - not mine. Also keep in mind that these articles
> are 5 years old and so some things have now been superceded like WMP9 for
> WMP7 and IE6 for IE5, etc.. and who knows what else has changed for the
> good - which hopefully all of it did.
>
> Also please understand just because I have pointed out these articles, does
> not mean I am against WME in any way, thank you. WME is a fine OS.
>
> Rick
>
>
>>MS
>

Lots of good info in those articles. I was able to save the original text by
renaming the saved file *.html, then converting to text, then a cleanup util to
take out excess spaces, then my text editor to remove leftover code.

MS

Rick Chauvin

February 16th 06, 08:47 PM

"ms" > wrote in message

> Forgot to add, no problem copying folder to folder on the hard drive in
> ME.

You are saying that if you copy from folder to folder on the hard drive
it's fine then?

If yes, then the problem is with the cd itself or the cdrom reading it.

yes?

Rick

>
> MS

February 17th 06, 12:26 AM

February 17th 06, 12:43 AM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>>Forgot to add, no problem copying folder to folder on the hard drive in
>>ME.
>
>
> You are saying that if you copy from folder to folder on the hard drive
> it's fine then?
>
> If yes, then the problem is with the cd itself or the cdrom reading it.
>
> yes?
>
> Rick
>
>
>>MS
>
Rick, this is a different question. In one of the links you gave me, Fred Langa
said he DELETED WinME and installed in it's place W98SE. Normally, he is very
careful with wording in his articles.

Is it really that simple? W98SE wants to be uninstalled, AFAIK.

Also, this is a 9 year old 700 MHZ Dell, do they do typically do anything nasty to
cause trouble doing the above?

Thanks,

MS

Rick Chauvin

February 17th 06, 01:37 AM

"ms" > wrote in message

> Rick, this is a different question. In one of the links you gave me,
> Fred Langa said he DELETED WinME and installed in it's place W98SE.
> Normally, he is very careful with wording in his articles.
>
> Is it really that simple?

Yes, but simple is only relative to each persons experience of knowing what
to do in relation to how many times they have done it. To go from ME to SE
again surly one would simply reformat the partition, and then do a from
scratch fresh install of SE, and is the only thing he could of meant by
saying 'deleted' and reinstall. It's a 1 hour job for those who do it
everyday, but if you personally have never done that procedure yet, then
plan on a day/s. Compared to how long it took you figuring out how to run
that delbin.bat, you will have your hands more than full to attempt this
project.

> W98SE wants to be uninstalled, AFAIK.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying SE wants to be uninstalled? Please
clarify.

> Also, this is a 9 year old 700 MHZ Dell, do they do typically do
> anything nasty to cause trouble doing the above?

Well I still have my Mom's (god bless her) old Dell Laptop laptop from back
then too sitting over on the shelf keeping it only in remembrance of her,
and it's similar to your specs and it was cutting edge in it's time (hard
to believe nowadays) ..but the thing is pretty slow comparatively to
today's models. Every time I boot it up (once a year in remembrance) I
twiddle my thumbs waiting for it to get out of it's own way (comparatively)
What do you want to use it for? Anyway, it's up to you what you want to do
with it whether you want to install SE or ME on it - either won't cause any
trouble, although a new laptop would be nice heh :)

nite,
Rick

>
> Thanks,
>
> MS

February 17th 06, 03:05 PM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>
>>Rick, this is a different question. In one of the links you gave me,
>>Fred Langa said he DELETED WinME and installed in it's place W98SE.
>>Normally, he is very careful with wording in his articles.
>>
>>Is it really that simple?
>
>
> Yes, but simple is only relative to each persons experience of knowing what
> to do in relation to how many times they have done it. To go from ME to SE
> again surly one would simply reformat the partition, and then do a from
> scratch fresh install of SE, and is the only thing he could of meant by
> saying 'deleted' and reinstall. It's a 1 hour job for those who do it
> everyday, but if you personally have never done that procedure yet, then
> plan on a day/s. Compared to how long it took you figuring out how to run
> that delbin.bat, you will have your hands more than full to attempt this
> project.
>
>
Yes, I'm sure of that.

>>W98SE wants to be uninstalled, AFAIK.
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by saying SE wants to be uninstalled? Please
> clarify.
>
I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since they need to
be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So he must have
uninstalled ME?

>
>>Also, this is a 9 year old 700 MHZ Dell, do they do typically do
>>anything nasty to cause trouble doing the above?
>
>
> Well I still have my Mom's (god bless her) old Dell Laptop laptop from back
> then too sitting over on the shelf keeping it only in remembrance of her,
> and it's similar to your specs and it was cutting edge in it's time (hard
> to believe nowadays) ..but the thing is pretty slow comparatively to
> today's models. Every time I boot it up (once a year in remembrance) I
> twiddle my thumbs waiting for it to get out of it's own way (comparatively)
> What do you want to use it for? Anyway, it's up to you what you want to do
> with it whether you want to install SE or ME on it - either won't cause any
> trouble, although a new laptop would be nice heh :)
>
> nite,
> Rick
>
I use it to try out installs, as I can't get a PCI modem to work in it, the
previous owner put a *1* KB (I'm not kidding) modem in place of the Dell one.

So since I'm used to working in W98SE, it would be nice to have it on the Dell,
too. Probably quicker, too.

MS

Shane

February 17th 06, 10:16 PM

Just to butt in on Rick's territory...

> I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since they
need to
> be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So he must have
> uninstalled ME?
>

You can only uninstall an OS if it was an upgrade. So if you upgrade 98 to
ME, you can - if you kept the uninstallation data - uninstall ME and go back
to 98. But formatting is not uninstalling, except in the loosest sense. It's
closer to deleting. You format if you want to get back to a blank disk and
start again.

The exception is however - and something I've done a no. of times - booting
to DOS, whereupon you can delete the majority of the system, but leaving the
file system intact with a select few files/folders. For instance, with an OS
that insists on being installed as an upgrade only, you can install to an
otherwise clean drive containing a folder called Windows, containing only a
file called WIN.COM (and not even a real win.com, just a renamed text file
will do). If you don't want to do an upgrade (as I never do!) you can
nonetheless retain things such as the latest 9x NVidia driver setup files
and other folders unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious minutes
from the new install. You can install an OS intended only to be installed to
a clean drive (such as my Win 98SE), to an in-use one this way, renaming
Win.com so that the installer doesn't find it!

Shane

Rick Chauvin

February 18th 06, 03:04 PM

"ms" > wrote in message

> Rick Chauvin wrote:

[...]
Since I live in the North East of the US the cold front and resulting very
strong wind storm that went through early yesterday knocked out
transmission poles all over the place - and so we were without power for a
day, etc... brrrrr

>> Is it really that simple? W98SE wants to be uninstalled, AFAIK.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by saying SE wants to be uninstalled? Please
>> clarify.

> I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since
> they need to be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So
> he must have uninstalled ME?

Okay I see what you meant but the wording threw me at first where when we
were talking about ME you said "W98SE wants to be uninstalled" and so
that was interesting wording. OS's can't be uninstalled per sey really,
and so I had answered that before by saying what Langa or whomever it was
must of meant by randomly not being clear saying 'deleting' could only mean
to format just as Shane also replied - but also the other variances Shane
expanded further upon are true too of course.

[...]

> I use it to try out installs, as I can't get a PCI modem to work in it,
> the previous owner put a *1* KB (I'm not kidding) modem in place of the
> Dell one.

Are you sure it wasn't a 33k or 22k modem? Don't think I've ever heard of
a 1

> So since I'm used to working in W98SE, it would be nice to have it on
> the Dell, too. Probably quicker, too.

Since you have more than one, and if you want, and if your up to it, might
as well just do a fresh install of whichever your OS pleasure is. If you
are a techie at heart or just love electronics like most of us here do - it
can be a lot of fun and a great learning experience especially when you
have another computer and so you are not forced to have it working all at
one time, or one day, and rush; actually though going through the OS
install screens and procedure only takes 20 to 40 minutes (depending on how
fast your computer specs are to copy/install/assimilate the CD's contents)
...or similarly if your like me and many you place the SE CD's Win98 folder
content directly within (creating) the C:\WINDOWS\Options\Cabs folder first
and then run setup from there via a boot disk - giving the few advantages
that can give etc . Have Phun :)

> MS

Rick Chauvin

February 18th 06, 03:06 PM

"Shane" > wrote in message

> Just to butt in on Rick's territory...

Actually Shane it was me coming in onto you guys groups territory ..yes
I know it's a public forum and is everyone's, but out of respect I see
yourself and Noel spend so much quality volunteer time helping others in
the ME group, for conversation sake I'll call it yours group :) ..and by
all means chime in anytime you would like - all of your help and knowledge
and valuable time you all volunteer is appreciated. My own schedule these
days does not allow me to post as much as I would like.

Thanks,
Rick

>
>> I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since
>> they need to be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So
>> he must have uninstalled ME?
>>
>
> You can only uninstall an OS if it was an upgrade. So if you upgrade 98
> to ME, you can - if you kept the uninstallation data - uninstall ME and
> go back to 98. But formatting is not uninstalling, except in the loosest
> sense. It's closer to deleting. You format if you want to get back to a
> blank disk and start again.
>
> The exception is however - and something I've done a no. of times -
> booting to DOS, whereupon you can delete the majority of the system, but
> leaving the file system intact with a select few files/folders. For
> instance, with an OS that insists on being installed as an upgrade only,
> you can install to an otherwise clean drive containing a folder called
> Windows, containing only a file called WIN.COM (and not even a real
> win.com, just a renamed text file will do). If you don't want to do an
> upgrade (as I never do!) you can nonetheless retain things such as the
> latest 9x NVidia driver setup files and other folders
> unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious minutes from the new
> install. You can install an OS intended only to be installed to a clean
> drive (such as my Win 98SE), to an in-use one this way, renaming Win.com
> so that the installer doesn't find it!
>
> Shane

February 18th 06, 10:01 PM

Rick Chauvin wrote:
> "ms" > wrote in message
>
>
>>Rick Chauvin wrote:
>
>
> [...]
> Since I live in the North East of the US the cold front and resulting very
> strong wind storm that went through early yesterday knocked out
> transmission poles all over the place - and so we were without power for a
> day, etc... brrrrr
>
>
>>>Is it really that simple? W98SE wants to be uninstalled, AFAIK.
>>>
>>>I'm not sure what you mean by saying SE wants to be uninstalled? Please
>>>clarify.
>
>
>>I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since
>>they need to be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So
>>he must have uninstalled ME?
>
>
> Okay I see what you meant but the wording threw me at first where when we
> were talking about ME you said "W98SE wants to be uninstalled" and so
> that was interesting wording. OS's can't be uninstalled per sey really,
> and so I had answered that before by saying what Langa or whomever it was
> must of meant by randomly not being clear saying 'deleting' could only mean
> to format just as Shane also replied - but also the other variances Shane
> expanded further upon are true too of course.
>
> [...]
>
>
>>I use it to try out installs, as I can't get a PCI modem to work in it,
>>the previous owner put a *1* KB (I'm not kidding) modem in place of the
>>Dell one.
>
>
> Are you sure it wasn't a 33k or 22k modem? Don't think I've ever heard of
> a 1
>
>
>>So since I'm used to working in W98SE, it would be nice to have it on
>>the Dell, too. Probably quicker, too.
>
>
> Since you have more than one, and if you want, and if your up to it, might
> as well just do a fresh install of whichever your OS pleasure is. If you
> are a techie at heart or just love electronics like most of us here do - it
> can be a lot of fun and a great learning experience especially when you
> have another computer and so you are not forced to have it working all at
> one time, or one day, and rush; actually though going through the OS
> install screens and procedure only takes 20 to 40 minutes (depending on how
> fast your computer specs are to copy/install/assimilate the CD's contents)
> ..or similarly if your like me and many you place the SE CD's Win98 folder
> content directly within (creating) the C:\WINDOWS\Options\Cabs folder first
> and then run setup from there via a boot disk - giving the few advantages
> that can give etc . Have Phun :)
>
>
>>MS

I'm not a techie, just an average user. Someday when I feel braver, I will
"convert" the Dell ME to W98SE. When I do, I will probably be on the W98 ng. I've
seen you there recently, didn't see Shane, but maybe I missed him. I only go to
these ng's with a problem, there is so much interesting stuff, I can't save it
all. I have installed W98SE, but have to brush up on things like Fdisk, as I need
to create some partitions.

BTW, the modem in properties was in fact a 1.2 KB modem, I'd never heard of that,
the previous owner took out the default Dell modem and put in this one to dump at
a garage same. Luckily I got it free.

MS

February 18th 06, 10:03 PM

Shane wrote:
> Just to butt in on Rick's territory...
>
>
>>I never heard of a windows 9X OS that could be simply deleted, since they
>
> need to
>
>>be installed, therefore it needs uninstallation, AFAIK. So he must have
>>uninstalled ME?
>>
>
>
> You can only uninstall an OS if it was an upgrade. So if you upgrade 98 to
> ME, you can - if you kept the uninstallation data - uninstall ME and go back
> to 98. But formatting is not uninstalling, except in the loosest sense. It's
> closer to deleting. You format if you want to get back to a blank disk and
> start again.
>
> The exception is however - and something I've done a no. of times - booting
> to DOS, whereupon you can delete the majority of the system, but leaving the
> file system intact with a select few files/folders. For instance, with an OS
> that insists on being installed as an upgrade only, you can install to an
> otherwise clean drive containing a folder called Windows, containing only a
> file called WIN.COM (and not even a real win.com, just a renamed text file
> will do). If you don't want to do an upgrade (as I never do!) you can
> nonetheless retain things such as the latest 9x NVidia driver setup files
> and other folders unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious minutes
> from the new install. You can install an OS intended only to be installed to
> a clean drive (such as my Win 98SE), to an in-use one this way, renaming
> Win.com so that the installer doesn't find it!
>
> Shane
>
>
Thanks, Shane, I will save it for when I need it.

Do you post to the corresponding W98 ng?

MS

Shane

February 19th 06, 12:30 AM

> > Just to butt in on Rick's territory...
>
> Actually Shane it was me coming in onto you guys groups territory ..yes
> I know it's a public forum and is everyone's, but out of respect I see
> yourself and Noel spend so much quality volunteer time helping others in
> the ME group, for conversation sake I'll call it yours group :) ..and by
> all means chime in anytime you would like - all of your help and knowledge
> and valuable time you all volunteer is appreciated. My own schedule these
> days does not allow me to post as much as I would like.

I can't quite figure whether I agree or disagree with you! I suspect this
group is unique due to the nature of the Win ME OS - that is, the type of
people who use it, and the type who in despising it mostly stay away. imo
more than any other group, this one's like a social club, you know? Win 3.x
groups attract real crazies, DOS groups are expert-only, plenty of good guys
use 98, but so do the 9x fascists, etc etc etc. Ok so it's only a
hypothesis, but what's important is *I* believe it! :-) Seriously, anyone
who wants to help, who values an atmosphere of mutual respect and who'd
rather read or write a gag than a complaint, is welcome here.

I did post a hell of a lot of (attempted) help once upon a time, but post
comparatively little these days. Noel remains prolific though!

Shane

Shane

February 19th 06, 12:58 AM

> > If you don't want to do an upgrade (as I never do!) you can
> > nonetheless retain things such as the latest 9x NVidia driver setup
files
> > and other folders unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious
minutes
> > from the new install.
> >
> Thanks, Shane, I will save it for when I need it.

You're welcome. Bear in mind, though, the time-saving of the above is only
really in special situations and probably not worth doing solely for that
reason. otoh, and the NVidia drivers are a case in point, if you had - as
many do - deleted the installation file, retaining C:\Nvidia would save
downloading it again. That would be a pretty big deal for someone on
dial-up, though I suspect most are now on BB (not that I know it for
certain).

Otherwise, the way to do the deletion is to make another batch file - from
DOS - to list the files and/or folders, then remove or comment out from the
list, or zip and later unzip, what you want to keep. Start Smartdrv and run
the batch to do the deleting. List the contents of Windows and you can
delete the majority of those (while retaining C:\Windows\Command, it's
contents and other files DOS needs to continue *after* deleting, in case you
decide you need to. It's a pain in the butt to delete the entire windows
folder then find, despite the fact the DOS tools already in memory still
run, those that aren't no longer can be!).

>
> Do you post to the corresponding W98 ng?
>

No. I have done briefly because others have crossposted, so my name may have
been seen there, but I don't think I ever have specifically posted to any 98
group. Quite surprisinf when I come to think of it!

Shane

February 19th 06, 02:39 PM

Shane wrote:
>>>If you don't want to do an upgrade (as I never do!) you can
>>>nonetheless retain things such as the latest 9x NVidia driver setup
>
> files
>
>>>and other folders unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious
>
> minutes
>
>>>from the new install.
>>>
>>
>>Thanks, Shane, I will save it for when I need it.
>
>
> You're welcome. Bear in mind, though, the time-saving of the above is only
> really in special situations and probably not worth doing solely for that
> reason. otoh, and the NVidia drivers are a case in point, if you had - as
> many do - deleted the installation file, retaining C:\Nvidia would save
> downloading it again. That would be a pretty big deal for someone on
> dial-up, though I suspect most are now on BB (not that I know it for
> certain).
>
> Otherwise, the way to do the deletion is to make another batch file - from
> DOS - to list the files and/or folders, then remove or comment out from the
> list, or zip and later unzip, what you want to keep. Start Smartdrv and run
> the batch to do the deleting. List the contents of Windows and you can
> delete the majority of those (while retaining C:\Windows\Command, it's
> contents and other files DOS needs to continue *after* deleting, in case you
> decide you need to. It's a pain in the butt to delete the entire windows
> folder then find, despite the fact the DOS tools already in memory still
> run, those that aren't no longer can be!).
>
>
>>Do you post to the corresponding W98 ng?
>>
>
>
> No. I have done briefly because others have crossposted, so my name may have
> been seen there, but I don't think I ever have specifically posted to any 98
> group. Quite surprisinf when I come to think of it!
>
> Shane
>
>
Then later, I may commit sacrilege and post a W98 question here. For me, help is
where you get it.

Mike Sa

February 19th 06, 11:45 PM

Shane wrote:
>>>If you don't want to do an upgrade (as I never do!) you can
>>>nonetheless retain things such as the latest 9x NVidia driver setup
>
> files
>
>>>and other folders unzipped-but-not-installed to C, shaving precious
>
> minutes
>
>>>from the new install.
>>>
>>
>>Thanks, Shane, I will save it for when I need it.
>
>
> You're welcome. Bear in mind, though, the time-saving of the above is only
> really in special situations and probably not worth doing solely for that
> reason. otoh, and the NVidia drivers are a case in point, if you had - as
> many do - deleted the installation file, retaining C:\Nvidia would save
> downloading it again. That would be a pretty big deal for someone on
> dial-up, though I suspect most are now on BB (not that I know it for
> certain).
>
> Otherwise, the way to do the deletion is to make another batch file - from
> DOS - to list the files and/or folders, then remove or comment out from the
> list, or zip and later unzip, what you want to keep. Start Smartdrv and run
> the batch to do the deleting. List the contents of Windows and you can
> delete the majority of those (while retaining C:\Windows\Command, it's
> contents and other files DOS needs to continue *after* deleting, in case you
> decide you need to. It's a pain in the butt to delete the entire windows
> folder then find, despite the fact the DOS tools already in memory still
> run, those that aren't no longer can be!).
>
>
>>Do you post to the corresponding W98 ng?
>>
>
>
> No. I have done briefly because others have crossposted, so my name may have
> been seen there, but I don't think I ever have specifically posted to any 98
> group. Quite surprisinf when I come to think of it!
>
> Shane
>
>
In 2 weeks, I will have a situation on my P166, maybe you have a comment, based on
above.

My master hard drive with my W98SE OS, will get moved to a new computer being
built for me, to run W98SE. Retained in this computer is the present slave drive,
will be later the only one. I want to continue to run W98SE on the existing
computer, with the present slave drive.

With the master gone, do I have to then do a new install on the present slave
after the transfer, or is there any way of copying the OS before the hardware
transfer?

Thanks

MS

Shane

February 20th 06, 09:09 PM

Answers in line, excuse the lapsing into pseudo legalese:

> My master hard drive with my W98SE OS, will get moved to a new computer
> being

Bear in mind you'd be transferring an installation with drivers for the
(very) old hardware and it almost certainly wouldn't boot, or if by some
miracle if it did, run for long without BSODs, on the new hardware. Or are
you going to re-install 98SE on this drive once in the new machine?

> built for me, to run W98SE. Retained in this computer is the present slave
> drive, will be later the only one. I want to continue to run W98SE on the
> existing computer, with the present slave drive.
>

Okay, what you seem to be asking - unintentionally perhaps - is whether you
can run the same installation (one derived originally from the same cd, I
guess) on two computers simultaneously.

According to the license (the accepting of the EULA before installation
completes) to run any legal version of Windows, you are expressly forbidden
to do so.

One would not go so far as to say it is *illegal* to act thus contrary to
the EULA - I do not know the situation pertaining when a third-party obtains
a machine on which is installed the copy of Windows in question, from the
original licensee/owner who has not informed the new licensee/owner of the
existence of said EULA, but I can only imagine that, insofar as anyone is
considered responsible in that situation it would be the original
licensee/owner and the new one is free to do what the hell he or she wants.

Anyhow, the point is that, as this is a *Microsoft-sponsored* newsgroup, I
cannot in all conscience say 'Go ahead and install your copy of Windows 98SE
on as many machines simulataneously as you like!', even if in practice the
only thing to stop a person doing so is their conscience.

> With the master gone, do I have to then do a new install on the present
> slave after the transfer, or is there any way of copying the OS before the
> hardware transfer?
>

Given that the current Master would need Windows re-installed on the new
machine, the thing to do would be to clone the Master to the Slave then
reverse them so that the Master becomes the Slave. Then check that Windows
does boot from the new Master. It does rather depend on what Imaging or
Backup software you have - for instance Microsoft's MSBackup is worth
uninstalling and erasing all memory of!

Take a look at Terabyte Unlimited's Image for Windows, which I would expect
can be used for 30 days as a trial (given that their Partition Managing
software, BING, can). This from PowerQuest Drive Image's (the one I use)
help file:

<quote>

Hiding the source drive will ensure that your drive letters do not change
when you reboot your computer. It can also avoid problems caused by having
two identical operating systems visible when you reboot. You can use this
option to copy an operating system to a new disk and hide the original
partitions. The new partitions will be active. You can set the new drive to
master and the old drive to slave, reboot and test the new operating system
with the old drive still in place in case something goes wrong.

</quote>

Shane

Shane

February 20th 06, 09:19 PM

> Given that the current Master would need Windows re-installed on the new
> machine, the thing to do would be to clone the Master to the Slave then
> reverse them so that the Master becomes the Slave. Then check that Windows
> does boot from the new Master.

Actually it doesn't matter what you're going to do with the original Master,
this is the way to transfer the OS to the Slave.

Shane

February 22nd 06, 04:57 PM

Shane wrote:
> Answers in line, excuse the lapsing into pseudo legalese:
>
>
>>My master hard drive with my W98SE OS, will get moved to a new computer
>>being
>
>
> Bear in mind you'd be transferring an installation with drivers for the
> (very) old hardware and it almost certainly wouldn't boot, or if by some
> miracle if it did, run for long without BSODs, on the new hardware. Or are
> you going to re-install 98SE on this drive once in the new machine?
>
>
>>built for me, to run W98SE. Retained in this computer is the present slave
>>drive, will be later the only one. I want to continue to run W98SE on the
>>existing computer, with the present slave drive.
>>
>
>
> Okay, what you seem to be asking - unintentionally perhaps - is whether you
> can run the same installation (one derived originally from the same cd, I
> guess) on two computers simultaneously.
>
> According to the license (the accepting of the EULA before installation
> completes) to run any legal version of Windows, you are expressly forbidden
> to do so.
>
> One would not go so far as to say it is *illegal* to act thus contrary to
> the EULA - I do not know the situation pertaining when a third-party obtains
> a machine on which is installed the copy of Windows in question, from the
> original licensee/owner who has not informed the new licensee/owner of the
> existence of said EULA, but I can only imagine that, insofar as anyone is
> considered responsible in that situation it would be the original
> licensee/owner and the new one is free to do what the hell he or she wants.
>
> Anyhow, the point is that, as this is a *Microsoft-sponsored* newsgroup, I
> cannot in all conscience say 'Go ahead and install your copy of Windows 98SE
> on as many machines simulataneously as you like!', even if in practice the
> only thing to stop a person doing so is their conscience.
>
>
>>With the master gone, do I have to then do a new install on the present
>>slave after the transfer, or is there any way of copying the OS before the
>>hardware transfer?
>>
>
>
> Given that the current Master would need Windows re-installed on the new
> machine, the thing to do would be to clone the Master to the Slave then
> reverse them so that the Master becomes the Slave. Then check that Windows
> does boot from the new Master. It does rather depend on what Imaging or
> Backup software you have - for instance Microsoft's MSBackup is worth
> uninstalling and erasing all memory of!
>
> Take a look at Terabyte Unlimited's Image for Windows, which I would expect
> can be used for 30 days as a trial (given that their Partition Managing
> software, BING, can). This from PowerQuest Drive Image's (the one I use)
> help file:
>
> <quote>
>
> Hiding the source drive will ensure that your drive letters do not change
> when you reboot your computer. It can also avoid problems caused by having
> two identical operating systems visible when you reboot. You can use this
> option to copy an operating system to a new disk and hide the original
> partitions. The new partitions will be active. You can set the new drive to
> master and the old drive to slave, reboot and test the new operating system
> with the old drive still in place in case something goes wrong.
>
> </quote>
>
> Shane
>
>
Your comments noted.

I will try to better define the situation (I hope!).

I. Now: P166
Hard drive #A (master) has W98SE in C partition.
Hard drive #B (slave) storage

II. Next week: P1.2 GHZ (new computer)
Hard drive NEW (master), will have fresh install of W98SE in C partition
Hard drive #A (becomes slave) storage, from P166

III. After that: P166
Hard drive #B will have W98SE in C partition

If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS install
on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????

I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A drive to the
B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I situation??

What a mess! I don't know if that's understandable.

Advice?

Mike

Shane

February 22nd 06, 10:54 PM

> If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
> install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????
>

Yes, not uninstalled. Not technically deleted, either. Boot to DOS (with a
boot disk) and run FORMAT <whatever drive letter A has at that point>

So, if it was now drive D, you'd run

FORMAT D:

That wipes it. I recommend first you create an unmistakable file on *one* of
the drives, then check which drive it's on from DOS. So you create a file in
the root called TESTFILE.TXT, then boot to DOS and type, eg

ATTRIB C:\TESTFILE.TXT

if it gives an affirmative answer, you know which drive is listed as C. If
you get 'File Not Found' try

ATTRIB D:\TESTFILE.TXT

The point of this is you don't wipe the wrong drive by mistake. There are
other tests you could make but this is the simplest.

If for some reason the new drive has not been set Active (thus designated
C:) the copying software will be able to correct that, but until I know the
software there's little point saying any more. But you have to have the
software.

> I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A
> drive to the B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I
> situation??
>

Powerquest Drive Image (what I have) - if it's still available.
I understand Acronis is good:
http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/migrateeasy/
Ghost 10.0 (XP/NT only) contains Ghost 2003 (98/ME), which as I understand
it will do it:
http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/backup_recovery/ghost10/index.html
Terabyte Unlimited I know is good, though I use (as I said) Drive Image:
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/copywipe.html

Shane

February 22nd 06, 11:35 PM

Thanks for the info.

Shane wrote:
>>If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
>>install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????
>>
>
>
> Yes, not uninstalled. Not technically deleted, either. Boot to DOS (with a
> boot disk) and run FORMAT <whatever drive letter A has at that point>
>
Initially, the working OS will be on the other NEW hard drive, then I will copy
lots of data files off this drive that has the old OS.

When I boot up, the windows in C on the NEW drive is always the one that runs?
So there will be time after I'm running to then format this drive?

> So, if it was now drive D, you'd run
>
> FORMAT D:
>
> That wipes it. I recommend first you create an unmistakable file on *one* of
> the drives, then check which drive it's on from DOS. So you create a file in
> the root called TESTFILE.TXT, then boot to DOS and type, eg
>
> ATTRIB C:\TESTFILE.TXT
>
> if it gives an affirmative answer, you know which drive is listed as C. If
> you get 'File Not Found' try
>
> ATTRIB D:\TESTFILE.TXT
>
> The point of this is you don't wipe the wrong drive by mistake. There are
> other tests you could make but this is the simplest.
>
> If for some reason the new drive has not been set Active (thus designated
> C:) the copying software will be able to correct that, but until I know the
> software there's little point saying any more. But you have to have the
> software.
>
>
>>I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A
>>drive to the B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I
>>situation??
>>
>
>
> Powerquest Drive Image (what I have) - if it's still available.
> I understand Acronis is good:
> http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/migrateeasy/
> Ghost 10.0 (XP/NT only) contains Ghost 2003 (98/ME), which as I understand
> it will do it:
> http://www.symantec.com/home_homeoffice/products/backup_recovery/ghost10/index.html
> Terabyte Unlimited I know is good, though I use (as I said) Drive Image:
> http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/copywipe.html
>
> Shane
>
>
Thanks

Mike

Shane

February 23rd 06, 03:13 AM

Heh, I'm still looking at this, trying to figure out exactly what the
situation is! But I think it's coming to me now...

> I. Now: P166
> Hard drive #A (master) has W98SE in C partition.
> Hard drive #B (slave) storage
>
> II. Next week: P1.2 GHZ (new computer)
> Hard drive NEW (master), will have fresh install of W98SE in C partition
> Hard drive #A (becomes slave) storage, from P166
>
> III. After that: P166
> Hard drive #B will have W98SE in C partition
>
> If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
> install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????

Okay, you *can* delete the contents of A, but it is much slower, more
complicated, and less comprehensive than running Format.

>
> I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A
> drive to the B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I
> situation??

Yes, using the software I gave the links to, the Master can be cloned to the
Slave, ie the drive's contents copied *exactly*. The software will set the
old Slave 'Active' and the old Master 'hidden'. It cannot, of course, swap
the
jumpers! But it will do everything else.

Be careful with FORMAT commands - although there is ample warning. The other
command to investigate is FDISK. When you run FDISK, remember to always
select 'Y' for yes when asked if you want to enable large disk support. Many
end up accidentally limiting the size of their disks to 2G by not selecting
this!

Running FDISK, you will get the option to view information for the other
disk (ie not the main one, which FDISK will *initially* display information
for). You can then use FDISK to delete the contents of that disk. And that
*is* deleting, but not so much deleting the operating system - although it
does do that - but deleting the file system! It leaves an unformatted
disk as opposed to one ready for installing another system to. However, if
you're using the disk again (for data this time around) you will still have
to format it, but you can do that in the new computer if you wish.

So, yes, you can blank the old Master before transferring it to the new
machine as a Slave.

Shane

Shane

February 23rd 06, 03:27 AM

"ms" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Shane wrote:
>>>If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
>>>install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, not uninstalled. Not technically deleted, either. Boot to DOS (with
>> a boot disk) and run FORMAT <whatever drive letter A has at that point>
>>
> Initially, the working OS will be on the other NEW hard drive, then I will
> copy lots of data files off this drive that has the old OS.
>
> When I boot up, the windows in C on the NEW drive is always the one that
> runs?
> So there will be time after I'm running to then format this drive?

It's pretty unlikely not to be the one that runs. But with 98/ME the
bootable partition has to be Primary rather than Logical, has to have a boot
sector, and has to have been set 'active'.

Boot Managers are akin to a switch. So imagine you're booting Windows 98SE
and Windows ME. With the switch in the 'up' position, Windows 98SE is set
'Active' and Windows ME is set 'Hidden'. With the switch in the 'down'
position, Windows 98SE is set 'Hidden' and Windows ME is set 'Active'. It
just toggles between the two states. The one that is set 'Active' is the one
designated C.

Shane

February 23rd 06, 02:34 PM

Shane wrote:
> Heh, I'm still looking at this, trying to figure out exactly what the
> situation is! But I think it's coming to me now...
>
>
>>I. Now: P166
>>Hard drive #A (master) has W98SE in C partition.
>>Hard drive #B (slave) storage
>>
>>II. Next week: P1.2 GHZ (new computer)
>>Hard drive NEW (master), will have fresh install of W98SE in C partition
>>Hard drive #A (becomes slave) storage, from P166
>>
>>III. After that: P166
>>Hard drive #B will have W98SE in C partition
>>
>>If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
>>install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????
>
>
> Okay, you *can* delete the contents of A, but it is much slower, more
> complicated, and less comprehensive than running Format.
>
>
>>I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A
>>drive to the B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I
>>situation??
>
>
> Yes, using the software I gave the links to, the Master can be cloned to the
> Slave, ie the drive's contents copied *exactly*. The software will set the
> old Slave 'Active' and the old Master 'hidden'. It cannot, of course, swap
> the
> jumpers! But it will do everything else.
>
> Be careful with FORMAT commands - although there is ample warning. The other
> command to investigate is FDISK. When you run FDISK, remember to always
> select 'Y' for yes when asked if you want to enable large disk support. Many
> end up accidentally limiting the size of their disks to 2G by not selecting
> this!
>
> Running FDISK, you will get the option to view information for the other
> disk (ie not the main one, which FDISK will *initially* display information
> for). You can then use FDISK to delete the contents of that disk. And that
> *is* deleting, but not so much deleting the operating system - although it
> does do that - but deleting the file system! It leaves an unformatted
> disk as opposed to one ready for installing another system to. However, if
> you're using the disk again (for data this time around) you will still have
> to format it, but you can do that in the new computer if you wish.
>
> So, yes, you can blank the old Master before transferring it to the new
> machine as a Slave.
>
>
> Shane
>
>
I'm glad you said the above, in place (I hope) of the content in your other email.
That one left me adrift w/o a paddle, if I was 20 and good sleep I could handle
it, but now it' somewhat tricky for me.

The above is in my ballpark, I need to digest it and get back.

Mike

Shane

February 23rd 06, 04:25 PM

"ms" > wrote in message
...
> Shane wrote:
>> Heh, I'm still looking at this, trying to figure out exactly what the
>> situation is! But I think it's coming to me now...
>>
>>
>>>I. Now: P166
>>>Hard drive #A (master) has W98SE in C partition.
>>>Hard drive #B (slave) storage
>>>
>>>II. Next week: P1.2 GHZ (new computer)
>>>Hard drive NEW (master), will have fresh install of W98SE in C partition
>>>Hard drive #A (becomes slave) storage, from P166
>>>
>>>III. After that: P166
>>>Hard drive #B will have W98SE in C partition
>>>
>>>If I understand it, in II, after the fresh install on New, the present OS
>>>install on hard drive A can be deleted- not uninstalled????
>>
>>
>> Okay, you *can* delete the contents of A, but it is much slower, more
>> complicated, and less comprehensive than running Format.
>>
>>
>>>I would like to transfer, somehow, the present install in I on the A
>>>drive to the B hard drive, to use in III, but can't do that in the I
>>>situation??
>>
>>
>> Yes, using the software I gave the links to, the Master can be cloned to
>> the
>> Slave, ie the drive's contents copied *exactly*. The software will set
>> the
>> old Slave 'Active' and the old Master 'hidden'. It cannot, of course,
>> swap the
>> jumpers! But it will do everything else.
>>
>> Be careful with FORMAT commands - although there is ample warning. The
>> other
>> command to investigate is FDISK. When you run FDISK, remember to always
>> select 'Y' for yes when asked if you want to enable large disk support.
>> Many
>> end up accidentally limiting the size of their disks to 2G by not
>> selecting
>> this!
>>
>> Running FDISK, you will get the option to view information for the other
>> disk (ie not the main one, which FDISK will *initially* display
>> information
>> for). You can then use FDISK to delete the contents of that disk. And
>> that
>> *is* deleting, but not so much deleting the operating system - although
>> it
>> does do that - but deleting the file system! It leaves an unformatted
>> disk as opposed to one ready for installing another system to. However,
>> if
>> you're using the disk again (for data this time around) you will still
>> have
>> to format it, but you can do that in the new computer if you wish.
>>
>> So, yes, you can blank the old Master before transferring it to the new
>> machine as a Slave.
>>
>>
>> Shane
>>
>>
> I'm glad you said the above, in place (I hope) of the content in your
> other email.

I'd just like to emphasise *not* e-mail. Newsgroup post. Wouldn't want
people thinking I was e-mailing you about this, mostly - I must admit - out
of vanity, for I wouldn't want to come across as amateurish. Or not *too*
amateurish, at least!

As for 'in place of', I seem to have posted so many times that I'm not
sure - without looking through them - which one you'd be referring to
specifically. I expect they're all a bit esoteric!

> That one left me adrift w/o a paddle, if I was 20 and good sleep I could
> handle it, but now it' somewhat tricky for me.

Yes, well, the longer one does this stuff, the further one seems to get from
speaking the same language as the typical user. I guess it's a requirement
one doesn't expect, language skills.

>
> The above is in my ballpark, I need to digest it and get back.
>

So...you're going to eat a baseball?

;-)

Shane