If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:28:11 -0700, "Bill in Co."
But the DLL swap is working GREAT for me, with no ill effects Can you confirm the exact version of the .DLLs you are using, and if they are from IE 5.5 SP2 or later? ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:28:11 -0700, "Bill in Co." But the DLL swap is working GREAT for me, with no ill effects Can you confirm the exact version of the .DLLs you are using, and if they are from IE 5.5 SP2 or later? Well, in my particular case, and not having taken in many, if any, WUs, I have the following versions: browseui.dll (the main source of the problem) ver 5.50.4936.2300 (12/23/03) browselc.dll (of lesser, if any, importance) version 5.50.4807.2300 (7/23/01) Note that both are the IE 5.5 versions (and from SP2) ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:42:04 -0600, "Bill in Co."
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:28:11 -0700, "Bill in Co." But the DLL swap is working GREAT for me, with no ill effects Can you confirm the exact version of the .DLLs you are using, and if they are from IE 5.5 SP2 or later? Note that both are the IE 5.5 versions (and from SP2) Brilliant, thanks - that's a datum I was waiting for :-) See http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm for a write-up of this bug. ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 13:42:04 -0600, "Bill in Co." cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote: On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 20:28:11 -0700, "Bill in Co." But the DLL swap is working GREAT for me, with no ill effects Can you confirm the exact version of the .DLLs you are using, and if they are from IE 5.5 SP2 or later? Note that both are the IE 5.5 versions (and from SP2) Brilliant, thanks - that's a datum I was waiting for :-) See http://cquirke.mvps.org/bexp1.htm for a write-up of this bug. yeehaw, thanks Chris... you'da man !! (I think I'm going back to WinME, this'll let me keep up with updates while staying relatively secure) Rick And just to add my own thoughts on the matter based on my experience with this bug: I note where "mouse or keyboard sticks during file operations" is listed as not being related... IME that occurred also with the upgrade to IE6 and I'm in for an uninstall if it isn't fixed. As to the cause, my magic 8-ball says IE6 WE relies on the NT threading model which causes 9x to go nicely pear-shaped (and explains the stickiness too). ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:05:02 -0400, Rick T
(I think I'm going back to WinME, this'll let me keep up with updates while staying relatively secure) Is WinME OK with this, in your experience? I note where "mouse or keyboard sticks during file operations" is listed as not being related... IME that occurred also with the upgrade to IE6 and I'm in for an uninstall if it isn't fixed. I mention that specifically because that's a far more ominous failure pattern, typically being due to delays deep down at the driver level. Nothing else seems to stop pointer movement (though delayed pointer type changes are common). The two that come to mind a - sick HD retries (HD LED on, silent or cyclical clanking) - LAN cable issues (HD LED typically off) As to the cause, my magic 8-ball says IE6 WE relies on the NT threading model which causes 9x to go nicely pear-shaped (and explains the stickiness too). More on that? ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:05:02 -0400, Rick T (I think I'm going back to WinME, this'll let me keep up with updates while staying relatively secure) Is WinME OK with this, in your experience? hasn't complained yet g... no, I just recently put Win2K on to see what it's like (different), the problems I experienced (apparently) with IE6 were on WinME. I note where "mouse or keyboard sticks during file operations" is listed as not being related... IME that occurred also with the upgrade to IE6 and I'm in for an uninstall if it isn't fixed. What typically would happen is during heavy disk usage the mouse would stop responding. I mention that specifically because that's a far more ominous failure pattern, typically being due to delays deep down at the driver level. Nothing else seems to stop pointer movement (though delayed pointer type changes are common). The two that come to mind a - sick HD retries (HD LED on, silent or cyclical clanking) - LAN cable issues (HD LED typically off) HD's fine though I occasionally get that first issue (occasionally as in once every couple months for a minute) As to the cause, my magic 8-ball says IE6 WE relies on the NT threading model which causes 9x to go nicely pear-shaped (and explains the stickiness too). More on that? pure speculation on my part; NT(/2K/XP) use a more advanced threading model; my theory is IE6 (specifically those 2 files) was writ with that in mind and it just barely works on 9x. Or, bluntly, there's too many forking file processes floating around tripping over each other for 9x to handle properly. Hmmm... wonder if anybody with that problem uses SCSI. Rick ps: Win2K is nice and is more robust than WinME (only one crash and that was on a non-cert driver) but booting takes a long time... WinME + license vs. Win2K without (or Win2K + $$$ to get one) is starting to get weighted towards WinME. I also have occasional mouse-sticking problems (on the original IE) with 2K, but that isn't restricted to file operations and feels more like a tasking priority issue; didn't with WinME + original IE. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 12:46:23 -0400, Rick T
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:05:02 -0400, Rick T Is WinME OK with this, in your experience? hasn't complained yet g... no, I just recently put Win2K on to see what it's like (different), the problems I experienced (apparently) with IE6 were on WinME. Are these "the" problem, or others? I'm fishin' for info to pin down the scope of "the" problem, within Win95/SR1/SR2/98/98SE/ME and IExx I note where "mouse or keyboard sticks during file operations" is listed as not being related... IME that occurred also with the upgrade to IE6 and I'm in for an uninstall if it isn't fixed. What typically would happen is during heavy disk usage the mouse would stop responding. That does not reassure me. Normal disk operations and general software overhead don't stick the mouse or delay keystrokes, as the interrupt routines for those services usually cut right through. Blocking them suggests a delay within similarly-low-level code, such as the interrupts that serve the HD itself. HD's fine though I occasionally get that first issue (occasionally as in once every couple months for a minute) I'm even less reassured! On my table this week we - HD that passes diags but reports "write error" fixing the FAT (!) - HD with patchy increased latency on DOS mode surface scan - HD that died outright and isn't coming back The last was a bitch. User's quite savvy, and I taked them through "the prelim" before the system came in; MemTest and DOS mode surface scan. Those passed OK, reportedly. System comes in and I do a formal virus scan; fixes a RAT. Then I leave it doing a DOS mode surface scan while doing other stuff. C: and D: pass OK, but then I hear clanking noises and see E:'s cluster progress counter has stopped. Power off, proceed to evacuate data. But HD makes clanking noises while delaying POST for ages; BIOS never sees HD. Shroud time. Only *then* does user tell me "oh yes it's been making clanking noises every now and then". The scary thing is, without that info and even with a best-practice approach to such matters, I'd still have had no reason to evacuate HD before doing anything else. So this sort of data tragedy could indeed happen again. As to the cause, my magic 8-ball says IE6 WE relies on the NT threading model which causes 9x to go nicely pear-shaped (and explains the stickiness too). More on that? pure speculation on my part; NT(/2K/XP) use a more advanced threading model; my theory is IE6 (specifically those 2 files) was writ with that in mind and it just barely works on 9x. Hm - too foggy to focus on, but I'd expect a "more advanced" threading model to be less likely to fall on it's ass ;-) Or, bluntly, there's too many forking file processes floating around tripping over each other for 9x to handle properly. I think there's some wrap-up overhead that spirals out of control or fails in some deadly embrace until some supervising timeout kicks in. Hmmm... wonder if anybody with that problem uses SCSI. Dunno. Win2K is nice and is more robust than WinME (only one crash and that was on a non-cert driver) but booting takes a long time... WinME + license vs. Win2K without (or Win2K + $$$ to get one) is starting to get weighted towards WinME. Win2000 is a different OS (NT 5.0 vs. Win9x 4.2 or whatever). I'd expect more robustness, faster if more RAM but slower in low RAM, and various compatibility tradeoffs. I also have occasional mouse-sticking problems (on the original IE) with 2K, but that isn't restricted to file operations and feels more like a tasking priority issue; didn't with WinME + original IE. OK. Scoping those on the basis of which HD was used may be revealing. ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
k, first for the stuff that *is* relevant to this part of the thread g
(the last time I had IE6 installed was last summer) Symptoms; with IE6 installed, large file deletes causes WE to hang; also file operations can cause mouse/GUI to stop until completion. WinME completely patched p3-667, 512MB VIA Apollo+ Chipset (Asus CuV4X MB) 4-in-1 drivers v4.37 Matrox G400 Creative SB0100 (SB Live) SoHoWare NIC Partition layout similar to yours. DMA2 on the drive. cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote: On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 12:46:23 -0400, Rick T cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote: On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:05:02 -0400, Rick T Is WinME OK with this, in your experience? hasn't complained yet g... no, I just recently put Win2K on to see what it's like (different), the problems I experienced (apparently) with IE6 were on WinME. Are these "the" problem, or others? I'm fishin' for info to pin down the scope of "the" problem, within Win95/SR1/SR2/98/98SE/ME and IExx I note where "mouse or keyboard sticks during file operations" is listed as not being related... IME that occurred also with the upgrade to IE6 and I'm in for an uninstall if it isn't fixed. What typically would happen is during heavy disk usage the mouse would stop responding. That does not reassure me. Normal disk operations and general software overhead don't stick the mouse or delay keystrokes, as the interrupt routines for those services usually cut right through. Blocking them suggests a delay within similarly-low-level code, such as the interrupts that serve the HD itself. HD's fine though I occasionally get that first issue (occasionally as in once every couple months for a minute) I'm even less reassured! On my table this week we - HD that passes diags but reports "write error" fixing the FAT (!) - HD with patchy increased latency on DOS mode surface scan bad spacing/temperature calibration algorithm? (user turned it off for some reason at some point in time) - HD that died outright and isn't coming back The last was a bitch. User's quite savvy, and I taked them through "the prelim" before the system came in; MemTest and DOS mode surface scan. Those passed OK, reportedly. System comes in and I do a formal virus scan; fixes a RAT. Then I leave it doing a DOS mode surface scan while doing other stuff. C: and D: pass OK, but then I hear clanking noises and see E:'s cluster progress counter has stopped. Power off, proceed to evacuate data. But HD makes clanking noises while delaying POST for ages; BIOS never sees HD. Shroud time. Only *then* does user tell me "oh yes it's been making clanking noises every now and then". The scary thing is, without that info and even with a best-practice approach to such matters, I'd still have had no reason to evacuate HD before doing anything else. So this sort of data tragedy could indeed happen again. could, hasn't happened in the last few months, though for me it'd be just an inconvenience. As to the cause, my magic 8-ball says IE6 WE relies on the NT threading model which causes 9x to go nicely pear-shaped (and explains the stickiness too). More on that? pure speculation on my part; NT(/2K/XP) use a more advanced threading model; my theory is IE6 (specifically those 2 files) was writ with that in mind and it just barely works on 9x. Hm - too foggy to focus on, but I'd expect a "more advanced" threading model to be less likely to fall on it's ass ;-) well the chair it's expecting to sit on could be non-existent. Or, bluntly, there's too many forking file processes floating around tripping over each other for 9x to handle properly. I think there's some wrap-up overhead that spirals out of control or fails in some deadly embrace until some supervising timeout kicks in. yup; dueling file-locks, etc. Hmmm... wonder if anybody with that problem uses SCSI. Dunno. because SCSI has an ordering mechanism in place. Win2K is nice and is more robust than WinME (only one crash and that was on a non-cert driver) but booting takes a long time... WinME + license vs. Win2K without (or Win2K + $$$ to get one) is starting to get weighted towards WinME. Win2000 is a different OS (NT 5.0 vs. Win9x 4.2 or whatever). I'd expect more robustness, faster if more RAM but slower in low RAM, and various compatibility tradeoffs. Much slower booting, a little faster all-round and speedier shutdown; a bit rougher 'round the edges user-friendly-wise than WinME. I also have occasional mouse-sticking problems (on the original IE) with 2K, but that isn't restricted to file operations and feels more like a tasking priority issue; didn't with WinME + original IE. OK. Scoping those on the basis of which HD was used may be revealing. ? It's a Quantum Bigfoot TS (last of the 5.25s) with specs comparable to a 5400... it ain't the drive. Rick ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com ---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|