Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! And to teach people this imperative, you deliberately advise them in such ways as to cause them grief. Such a miserable soul. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:g5HZj.1386$JI2.544@newsfe13.lga... > > Blindly following ANYONE'S recommendations and > allowing others do your thinking for you are tactics > that are bound to eventually engender consequences. > >
Guest PCR Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! James wrote: | Hello, | | | | I am trying to fix my dad's computer for him. He is running Windows | 98 SE on an IDE WD 80 GB HD. The computer will freeze up on him at | all different times. It can be on startup, after running for a short | while or after a long while, but does it everyday. Once it starts on | that day it does it a lot. (1) A quick thing might be to try Safe Mode, to see whether it freezes there. If not, then it is likely something in the Startup Group or a 32-bit Normal Mode driver doing it. Then, there is an MSCONFIG troubleshooting method for that, explained in "START, Help, Contents, Troubleshooting, Windows 98 Troubleshooters, Startup & Shutdown section". Post back for a way to fix the Troubleshooters, if you get blank pages. Also... http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;281965 How to Troubleshoot Using the Msconfig Utility with Windows 98 (281965) - This article describes how to use the Microsoft System Configuration (Msconfig) utility to troubleshoot configuration errors in Windows 98 and Windows 98 Second Edition. Careful with that one, though. Don't turn off System.ini or Win.ini, unless you know how to restore them in DOS. To get to Safe Mode, hit F5 as you boot. Or hit Ctrl for the Startup Menu, if not already enabled at "START, Run, MSConfig, Advanced button". (2) The mouse & keyboard are the ones with moving parts, & they are "hooked", meaning tasks will run each time you touch one. Therefore, with the computer off, unplug the mouse & hold by it's tail until it may stop spinning & squawking. Also, open & clean the ball & rollers. That is not a design you may see on the rollers-- it is a band of dirt running round the center! Also, unplug the keyboard, turn it round & spank it. I did plenty of THAT, when I suffered erratic mouse movements & ultimate mouse freeze. Unfortunately, I more/more dimly recall, there were still one/two freezes AFTER the last cleaning. STILL, it is good to get the gook out of there, I think. UPDATE: Eventually, I replaced my mouse-- & all of that finally went away for good! (3) If disabling your virus checker's auto-"System" scan, using it's Tray button, leaving the other types on, gives immediate & dramatic relief, I have further info. This supposedly applies to Scan Engine 4.1.60. UPDATE: McAfee no longer works for Win98, anyhow. But do as Terhune said and reveal what you do use. Norton is known to be sometimes problematic as well. (4) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;327551&Product=w98 USB Mouse May Hang When the Computer Is Idle for a Long Time So, if you have "Find Fast", try disabling that. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=199787 OFF2000: How to Turn Off the Find Fast Indexer http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;158705 OFF97: How to Disable the Find Fast Indexer http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;135476 OFF95: Office for Windows 95 Find Fast Indexer Overview (5) For sluggishness in navigating folders: Open Explorer, R-Clk My Documents in the left pane, & select Properties. How many folders does it contain? If it is around 100, try moving them out. Reboot. Is your sluggishness gone? (6) Update definitions & check for viruses, and... http://aumha.org/a/parasite.htm http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm http://www.mvps.org/inetexplorer/Darnit.htm#tshoot http://patrick.kolla.de/spybotsd.html SpyBot- Search & Destroy. SpyBot is gabby in it's "Checks" & "Fixes" logs. Turn them off in "Settings". http://www.lavasoftusa.com/ AdAware http://www.lavasoftusa.de/ Also AdAware http://www.merijn.org/cwschronicles.html CoolWebSearch Chronicles http://www.merijn.org/files/cwshredder.zip & CWShredder http://www.merijn.org/files/hijackthis.zip Finally, Hijack This http://aumha.org/a/hjttutor.htm Hijack This Logs Tutorial-- MUST read! ....may find something. (Actually, they certainly will.) http://hometown.aol.co.uk/jrmc137/hjttutorial/tutorial.htm Another one worthy of serious study! | Here is what I did so far: | | Replaced hard drive- my dad's request. Huh? After that, did you do a fresh install or restore a full system backup? Which hard drive is in there now-- the new one or the old one? | Replaced cable for hard drive | | Replaced cooling fan in power box, original fan made awful noise at | startup. | | Added extra cooling fan; mid tower. | | | | After replacing the hard drive I ran the Manufacture's diagnostics | software on the old drive, found no errors. I also did a scan disk | and defrag with no trouble. So I don't believe the hard drive was the | problem. Well-- after the Scandisk & Defrag, you would have to run again to see whether that cured him. It has a chance of working to some extent, especially if optimization is enabled during the Defrag. | The computer ran for me all night using the old drive with | the case open and a fan blowing on it near by. So it could have been | a heat problem. Are you saying it ran well (without freezes) after doing the Scandisk/Defrag? Then, that problem seems to be solved? | I would like to test the following before giving the computer back: | | | | RAM | | All hardware Here are some others have posted... http://www.simmtester.com/PAGE/products/doc/docinfo.asp RAM tester http://www.memtest86.com/ RAM tester http://oca.microsoft.com/en/windiag.asp RAM tester | Look for hardware and program conflicts. "Start button, Run, MSInfo32, Components, Problem Devices" Does anything show up there? Use the Edit menu to copy, & post it. | Can anyone please suggest the best software for doing the above? Any | other suggestions would be very much welcomed too. I doubt what I did | so far fixed the computer. I don't have a lot of time to spend | watching the computer run. He has been dealing with this freezing | problem for a long time and has gotten very aggravated over it. He is | now dealing with having cancer and going for chemo treatments so I | would like to give the computer back to him fixed. It it freezes again, switch mice with him to see whether that is the quickest fix. Next, switch away from McAfee (if he still could somehow be running that) or Norton to... http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html The home edition of avast! is free. It has a few peccadilloes, but generally works just fine. I am very pleased with it. The only brief freeze I detect is just after it has done an auto update of definitions & it is about to post its Summary.txt file. Until it posts that little file, you will have a busy mouse pointer. | Thank you in advance for any and all help! You are welcome. I wish him well. | James -- Thanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net
Guest . Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! Just more of your pathetically feeble attempts at "misinformation and misrepresentation". The astute observer will note how you conveniently and cowardly excised the vast majority of my germane remarks, which also included: "But I'm neither advocate nor critic per se, just passing along a utility that worked well for me. Though as always, caveat emptor, don't buy a pig in a poke, don't blindly accept advice from anonymous strangers and don't let anyone else do your thinking for you." As others have already paraphrased and would doubtlessly concur, you, in fact, are quite evidently and conspicuously an imbalanced, wretched and 'miserable soul' indeed. "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:%23E$LzKTvIHA.5472@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > And to teach people this imperative, you deliberately advise them in such > ways as to cause them grief. Such a miserable soul. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:g5HZj.1386$JI2.544@newsfe13.lga... > > > > Blindly following ANYONE'S recommendations and > > allowing others do your thinking for you are tactics > > that are bound to eventually engender consequences.
Guest MEB Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:88HZj.1387$JI2.412@newsfe13.lga... | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message | news:%23AXjBMQvIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... | > Excuse me for butting in, but *I* did supply the warning in the | > post/discussion *warning* about installing these things in already updated | > systems. | > I personally HAVE tested numerous of these compilations, and DO warn | > concerning their use when such appears in this group. | > | > I agree, the works are at best "beta tests" as I have repeatedly posted in | > this group; I also agree that the documentation is slim and poorly | > researched and presented.. I also would like to see a more extensive | review | > of these compilations. | > | > But I also see the potential value, for some, that these might provide. | > However, I would also like to see the sites which provide these, to also | > provide support forums for these updaters, where those with issues can | > address them without scorn. With Summaries and Warnings CLEARLY posted | > throughout the sites. | > CLEARLY, those who post that these are fail-safe or attempt to direct in | > the fashion, are failing to address the differing configurations of the | > individual systems. They are also CLEARLY failing to address the differing | > applications which might be installed within those *unofficially* updated | > systems. | > MOST IMPORTANTLY, they also CLEARLY fail to address the additional | security | > risks and other issues which become part of this un-official updating. | > Many of these official updates can be modified to work within 9X, but for | > them to work safely [or what is purported as such in Microsoft | > environments], they NEED the other functions/services available within the | > OS for which they were originally intended. | > | > I have yet to find the sites which have setup proper testing facilities | to | > test and attack these systems. I have yet to see the file and system error | > check reports. I have yet to find the sites which deal with the | > inter-relationships of these updates and the ramifications thereby | related.. | > As such, ALL usage of these unofficial updaters should be taken with | extreme | > caution and skepticism. | > | > Stating that "it works for me" means nothing and produces an air that | these | > are OKAY for everyone, which they are NOT.. | > | > -- | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com | > -- | | Sorry but as an attorney(?), I'd think that you would be | well aware that stating "X works for me" hardly constitutes | "it's okay for everyone" to a rational, responsible adult. And where in society do you find those illusive rational, responsible adults??? Are they on the endangered list, perhaps hidden in some dark cave in some human preserve somewhere... If you bother to look at this world, with its UTUBE, MYSPACE, pundits, dating services, and all those other apparent schizophrenic activities, fostering unbased impressions and myth, just where do you think people find their sensibilities to become responsible, rational adults... is it your contention that somehow this growing majority of people will, at some time, get off their pharmaceuticals long enough to actually become such? -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | | | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message | > news:%23W7tE1PvIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... | > | LOL! You can't decently defend one accusation I made. Look, just because | > it | > | hasn't caused YOU any problems, it HAS caused problems, as you've seen | in | > | this group in just the past couple of days. And, pray tell, who else | here | > | has said anything negative about AP except me? How could I possibly be | > | "relying solely on snippets and the barbs of others"? My opinions are | > | entirely my own, you twit. | > | | > | I CERTAINLY read that page of "instructions" and it isn't anything of | the | > | sort. I CERTAINLY, reviewed the forum to a fair extent, and it was | totally | > | non-informative about the app except to prove that lots of people have | > | problems with it and they seem to be mostly problems of incompatibility | > with | > | other apps and (as seen in this group) hardware. That indicates | > insufficient | > | testing. It CERTAINLY caused at least two people in this group grief | when | > | they tried it, with problems you apparently don't know the answer to, | and | > in | > | one case will apparently require a total rebuild to "fix" it. I | CERTAINLY | > | *have* downloaded it and looked into it, but I don't have a machine I | feel | > | like rebuilding right now, so I'd be stupid to actually run it. And | other | > | than that one "comment", I DON'T see ANYWHERE where it says, "Only run | > this | > | on a fresh install of Windows 98." You'd think that was rather an | > important | > | thing for the new user to know. But, of course, I've read a lot, | > everything | > | available except not ALL of the dozens of pages of MSFN forum, and | that's | > | the only place that little rule is mentioned, so I think YOU are the one | > | that's off the wall and that a fresh install isn't supposed to be a | > | requirement at all. Hey, if you really don't know what you're talking | > about, | > | you should keep your yap shut. | > | | > | The whole IDEA of Auto-Patcher is wrong-headed and it's full of | potential | > | problems because of all the unofficial updates and attempts at building | 98 | > | patches from XP versions, but even then, it's not ready for | distribution. | > | It's barely reached Beta stage. Responsible people generally do not | > | recommend Beta products to others. | > | | > | NOT ONLY WILL I NOT USE Auto-Patcher, I WILL SLAM IT AND BAD MOUTH | ANYONE | > | WHO EVEN RECOMMENDS IT, now and for the foreseeable future. It's a big a | > | pile of crap as I've seen in a long time. Like something Symantec might | > | vomit out. | > | | > | Lastly, quit brown-nosing me and go find someone else to pretend you're | > the | > | equal of. You're an ignorant cuss, enamored of a juvenile circle-jerk | > called | > | "Auto-Patcher". If you want a metaphor, try Communism, the "peoples' | > party" | > | Valhalla that never managed to accomplish anything but evil. | > | | > | Let me put it more simply -- If people want Windows XP (or Vista), they | > | should go out and buy them, instead of trying to make Windows 98 into | > | something it can never decently be. | > | | > | -- | > | Gary S. Terhune | > | MS-MVP Shell/User | > | http://www.grystmill.com | > | | > | "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message | > news:qoCZj.89588$y05.29430@newsfe22.lga... | > | > Don't like it? Don't use it, simple as that; albeit your "review" | > | > is tantamount to an evaluation of a book where the critic has | > | > not only not read the work (let alone perused the Cliff Notes) | > | > but instead haughtily berates those that have relying solely on | > | > snippets and the barbs of others. In any case, to each his own. | > | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message | > | > news:%23oHcbvOvIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... | > | >> Would be nice if the author could bother to put a real front page on | > that | > | >> thing. Would be nice if the people slogging this product in this | group, | > | >> along with the rest of the author's cohort, could be bothered to | > provide | > | > the | > | >> important links regarding it's use. So far, I have a link to MSFN | that | > | > looks | > | >> just like any other product development discussion -- two freakin' | > years | > | >> worth. A new user is supposed to slog through that to find a list of | > | >> instructions? A new user, in order to avoid SERIOUS FOUL-UPS, is | > supposed | > | > to | > | >> do this? | > | >> | > | >> OK, so I go to soporific.com, expecting there'll be instructions | there. | > | >> Nope, just list of folders. So it's guessing game time. OK, I'll | click | > on | > | >> Main. Hmm.... bunch of political blather... Oh, there it is in the | > upper | > | >> right corner, Ok... Whaddya know, it's the page that you so kindly | > linked | > | >> to, the one nobody else who slogs the app here seems to know about. | > | >> | > | >> Just a long list of 47 "Comments", one of which, by golly, suggests | > that | > | > my | > | >> Unofficial Time Zones Update package be included. I assume it wasn't, | > | > since | > | >> I haven't heard from the author. (Oh, and down around "COMMENT" 26 is | > | >> your | > | >> "Instruction". Sorry, but that doesn't qualify as an "Instruction". | > | >> | > | >> So, maybe the app is useful, and maybe it is even a God Send for IT | > | > people. | > | >> (But I think people who try to turn Windows 98 into Windows XP have | > | >> something missing in their soul.) But it was the HEIGHT of | > | > irresponsibility | > | >> for anyone in this group to be promoting it, because frankly, it | isn't | > | >> finished, and/or they don't really know anything about it, and/or if | > they | > | > | > | > DO | > | >> know anything about it, they don't apparently know the most important | > | >> thing -- AP is only to be applied to a fresh install. | > | >> | > | >> And, in the end, I don't believe the author had anything like the | > proper | > | >> amount of time or a sufficient depth of testers to allow, on such a | > | > massive | > | >> pile of cobbled together "patches", anything like a decent margin of | > | > safety. | > | >> And while a forum works well when building an app by committee, it | does | > | > NOT | > | >> substitute for a manual of instructions, nor all the other usual | items | > | >> you | > | >> see on an app's download page, like Min. Reqs., CAUTIONS, etc. I | mean, | > if | > | >> the author KNOWS the app is going to choke and cause problems on | anythi | > ng | > | >> but a new installation, why THAT info should be the title of the | damned | > | >> page, not some note buried in Comment 25. | > | >> | > | >> No, not only is this a dangerous abortion of an app for the casual | > user, | > | > it | > | >> fails my own minimum requirements for any app worth a damn. My | opinion | > of | > | >> those promoting it here is that they lack any sense of responsibility | > | > toward | > | >> the innocents who come here looking for advice. I say SHAME ON YOU, | one | > | > and | > | >> all. | > | >> | > | >> -- | > | >> Gary S. Terhune | > | >> MS-MVP Shell/User | > | >> http://www.grystmill.com | > | >> | > | >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message | > | > news:EppZj.89523$y05.52341@newsfe22.lga... | > | >> > "J. P. Gilliver" <john.gilliver@baesystems.com> wrote in message | > | >> > news:4835af64$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... | > | >> >> Gary S. Terhune wrote: | > | >> >> > "Don Phillipson" <e925@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message | > | >> >> [] | > | >> >> >> Experts usually recommend that this be done every year or | > | >> >> >> two. It takes less than an hour thus seems prerequisite | before | > | >> >> >> assuming hardware causes the problem in this PC (presumably | > | >> >> >> 5 to 10 years old.) | > | >> >> > | > | >> >> > Pray tell, what "experts" recommend this habitual reinstallation | > of | > | >> >> > Win98? That's a load of pure B.S. And, yes, installing Windows | > takes | > | >> >> > ~ 1 hour. But it can take days to finish the job properly. One | > very, | > | >> >> > very long day, at best. | > | >> >> | > | >> >> Hooray! I was going to say more or less the very same thing. | > | >> >> | > | >> >> As part of trying to get that microscope working, I used | soporific's | > | >> >> autopatcher - yes, you were all right to say be very careful with | > it: | > | > it | > | >> >> broke my PC [freezes during boot]. (Yes, I know it only does | > patches. | > | > All | > | >> >> right, one of them broke it. Same end result.) Probably | > irretrievable | > | >> > broken | > | >> >> now, due to the tinkering I've done to try to get it back, but I'm | > | >> >> very | > | >> > loth | > | >> >> to do a reinstall, as there are signs that my setup is still there | > | >> >> underneath: it (initially) would still boot into Safe Mode, for | > | > example. | > | >> >> (Now just gets as far as the background pattern in Safe Mode. Can | > | >> >> still | > | >> > get | > | >> >> to command prompt no problem.) | > | >> >> | > | >> >> Any suggestions (other than not be a silly boy again)? | > | >> > | > | >> > Is it any wonder that a user that couldn't or wouldn't verify | > | >> > the microscope mfg's requirements for the OS also couldn't | > | >> > or wouldn't bother to follow instructions regarding program | > | >> > installation and then blames the utility's (AP) packager? ;^) | > | >> > | > | >> > Per the author's instructions, Auto-Patcher is supposed | > | >> > to be applied to a fresh install of Windows 98 SE. Re: | > | >> > The correct sequence is: | > | >> > 1. Install Win98se | > | >> > 2. Install Auto-Patcher and use it. | > | >> > http://soporific.dsleague.com/main/?page_id=7 | > | >> > | > | >> > I've followed that recommendation and despite heavy usage | > | >> > continue to not have the slightest conceivable issue with Auto- | > | >> > Patcher, I've in fact had quite the exact opposite experience. | |
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! The acute observer would notice that I'm right. You're a weasel. The proof lies in your contributions of today. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:shKZj.3$BK1.2@newsfe17.phx... > Just more of your pathetically feeble attempts at > "misinformation and misrepresentation". The astute > observer will note how you conveniently and cowardly > excised the vast majority of my germane remarks, which > also included: "But I'm neither advocate nor critic per se, > just passing along a utility that worked well for me. Though > as always, caveat emptor, don't buy a pig in a poke, don't > blindly accept advice from anonymous strangers and don't > let anyone else do your thinking for you." > > As others have already paraphrased and would doubtlessly > concur, you, in fact, are quite evidently and conspicuously > an imbalanced, wretched and 'miserable soul' indeed. > > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:%23E$LzKTvIHA.5472@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> And to teach people this imperative, you deliberately advise them in such >> ways as to cause them grief. Such a miserable soul. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:g5HZj.1386$JI2.544@newsfe13.lga... >> > >> > Blindly following ANYONE'S recommendations and >> > allowing others do your thinking for you are tactics >> > that are bound to eventually engender consequences. > >
Guest . Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:eDLvhEUvIHA.1768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > > "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:88HZj.1387$JI2.412@newsfe13.lga... > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message > | news:%23AXjBMQvIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > | > Excuse me for butting in, but *I* did supply the warning in the > | > post/discussion *warning* about installing these things in already > updated > | > systems. > | > I personally HAVE tested numerous of these compilations, and DO warn > | > concerning their use when such appears in this group. > | > > | > I agree, the works are at best "beta tests" as I have repeatedly posted > in > | > this group; I also agree that the documentation is slim and poorly > | > researched and presented.. I also would like to see a more extensive > | review > | > of these compilations. > | > > | > But I also see the potential value, for some, that these might provide. > | > However, I would also like to see the sites which provide these, to also > | > provide support forums for these updaters, where those with issues can > | > address them without scorn. With Summaries and Warnings CLEARLY posted > | > throughout the sites. > | > CLEARLY, those who post that these are fail-safe or attempt to direct > in > | > the fashion, are failing to address the differing configurations of the > | > individual systems. They are also CLEARLY failing to address the > differing > | > applications which might be installed within those *unofficially* > updated > | > systems. > | > MOST IMPORTANTLY, they also CLEARLY fail to address the additional > | security > | > risks and other issues which become part of this un-official updating. > | > Many of these official updates can be modified to work within 9X, but > for > | > them to work safely [or what is purported as such in Microsoft > | > environments], they NEED the other functions/services available within > the > | > OS for which they were originally intended. > | > > | > I have yet to find the sites which have setup proper testing facilities > | to > | > test and attack these systems. I have yet to see the file and system > error > | > check reports. I have yet to find the sites which deal with the > | > inter-relationships of these updates and the ramifications thereby > | related.. > | > As such, ALL usage of these unofficial updaters should be taken with > | extreme > | > caution and skepticism. > | > > | > Stating that "it works for me" means nothing and produces an air that > | these > | > are OKAY for everyone, which they are NOT.. > | > > | > -- > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com > | > -- > | > | Sorry but as an attorney(?), I'd think that you would be > | well aware that stating "X works for me" hardly constitutes > | "it's okay for everyone" to a rational, responsible adult. > > > And where in society do you find those illusive rational, responsible > adults??? Are they on the endangered list, perhaps hidden in some dark cave > in some human preserve somewhere... > > If you bother to look at this world, with its UTUBE, MYSPACE, pundits, > dating services, and all those other apparent schizophrenic activities, > fostering unbased impressions and myth, just where do you think people find > their sensibilities to become responsible, rational adults... is it your > contention that somehow this growing majority of people will, at some time, > get off their pharmaceuticals long enough to actually become such? > > -- > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com Society's ills can't justifiably be placed at my doorstep. Please agan peruse what I've scribed and inform me, if you would, where it is that I've acted irresponsibly. But kindly don't confuse my truly commendable, volunteer, humanitarian and helpful efforts at purging vermin and other highly undesirables found in usenet newsgroups ;^) > -- > _________ > | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > | > news:%23W7tE1PvIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > | > | LOL! You can't decently defend one accusation I made. Look, just > because > | > it > | > | hasn't caused YOU any problems, it HAS caused problems, as you've seen > | in > | > | this group in just the past couple of days. And, pray tell, who else > | here > | > | has said anything negative about AP except me? How could I possibly be > | > | "relying solely on snippets and the barbs of others"? My opinions are > | > | entirely my own, you twit. > | > | > | > | I CERTAINLY read that page of "instructions" and it isn't anything of > | the > | > | sort. I CERTAINLY, reviewed the forum to a fair extent, and it was > | totally > | > | non-informative about the app except to prove that lots of people have > | > | problems with it and they seem to be mostly problems of > incompatibility > | > with > | > | other apps and (as seen in this group) hardware. That indicates > | > insufficient > | > | testing. It CERTAINLY caused at least two people in this group grief > | when > | > | they tried it, with problems you apparently don't know the answer to, > | and > | > in > | > | one case will apparently require a total rebuild to "fix" it. I > | CERTAINLY > | > | *have* downloaded it and looked into it, but I don't have a machine I > | feel > | > | like rebuilding right now, so I'd be stupid to actually run it. And > | other > | > | than that one "comment", I DON'T see ANYWHERE where it says, "Only run > | > this > | > | on a fresh install of Windows 98." You'd think that was rather an > | > important > | > | thing for the new user to know. But, of course, I've read a lot, > | > everything > | > | available except not ALL of the dozens of pages of MSFN forum, and > | that's > | > | the only place that little rule is mentioned, so I think YOU are the > one > | > | that's off the wall and that a fresh install isn't supposed to be a > | > | requirement at all. Hey, if you really don't know what you're talking > | > about, > | > | you should keep your yap shut. > | > | > | > | The whole IDEA of Auto-Patcher is wrong-headed and it's full of > | potential > | > | problems because of all the unofficial updates and attempts at > building > | 98 > | > | patches from XP versions, but even then, it's not ready for > | distribution. > | > | It's barely reached Beta stage. Responsible people generally do not > | > | recommend Beta products to others. > | > | > | > | NOT ONLY WILL I NOT USE Auto-Patcher, I WILL SLAM IT AND BAD MOUTH > | ANYONE > | > | WHO EVEN RECOMMENDS IT, now and for the foreseeable future. It's a big > a > | > | pile of crap as I've seen in a long time. Like something Symantec > might > | > | vomit out. > | > | > | > | Lastly, quit brown-nosing me and go find someone else to pretend > you're > | > the > | > | equal of. You're an ignorant cuss, enamored of a juvenile circle-jerk > | > called > | > | "Auto-Patcher". If you want a metaphor, try Communism, the "peoples' > | > party" > | > | Valhalla that never managed to accomplish anything but evil. > | > | > | > | Let me put it more simply -- If people want Windows XP (or Vista), > they > | > | should go out and buy them, instead of trying to make Windows 98 into > | > | something it can never decently be. > | > | > | > | -- > | > | Gary S. Terhune > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User > | > | http://www.grystmill.com > | > | > | > | "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message > | > news:qoCZj.89588$y05.29430@newsfe22.lga... > | > | > Don't like it? Don't use it, simple as that; albeit your "review" > | > | > is tantamount to an evaluation of a book where the critic has > | > | > not only not read the work (let alone perused the Cliff Notes) > | > | > but instead haughtily berates those that have relying solely on > | > | > snippets and the barbs of others. In any case, to each his own. > | > | > > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > | > | > news:%23oHcbvOvIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > | > | >> Would be nice if the author could bother to put a real front page > on > | > that > | > | >> thing. Would be nice if the people slogging this product in this > | group, > | > | >> along with the rest of the author's cohort, could be bothered to > | > provide > | > | > the > | > | >> important links regarding it's use. So far, I have a link to MSFN > | that > | > | > looks > | > | >> just like any other product development discussion -- two freakin' > | > years > | > | >> worth. A new user is supposed to slog through that to find a list > of > | > | >> instructions? A new user, in order to avoid SERIOUS FOUL-UPS, is > | > supposed > | > | > to > | > | >> do this? > | > | >> > | > | >> OK, so I go to soporific.com, expecting there'll be instructions > | there. > | > | >> Nope, just list of folders. So it's guessing game time. OK, I'll > | click > | > on > | > | >> Main. Hmm.... bunch of political blather... Oh, there it is in the > | > upper > | > | >> right corner, Ok... Whaddya know, it's the page that you so kindly > | > linked > | > | >> to, the one nobody else who slogs the app here seems to know about. > | > | >> > | > | >> Just a long list of 47 "Comments", one of which, by golly, suggests > | > that > | > | > my > | > | >> Unofficial Time Zones Update package be included. I assume it > wasn't, > | > | > since > | > | >> I haven't heard from the author. (Oh, and down around "COMMENT" 26 > is > | > | >> your > | > | >> "Instruction". Sorry, but that doesn't qualify as an "Instruction". > | > | >> > | > | >> So, maybe the app is useful, and maybe it is even a God Send for IT > | > | > people. > | > | >> (But I think people who try to turn Windows 98 into Windows XP have > | > | >> something missing in their soul.) But it was the HEIGHT of > | > | > irresponsibility > | > | >> for anyone in this group to be promoting it, because frankly, it > | isn't > | > | >> finished, and/or they don't really know anything about it, and/or > if > | > they > | > | > > | > | > DO > | > | >> know anything about it, they don't apparently know the most > important > | > | >> thing -- AP is only to be applied to a fresh install. > | > | >> > | > | >> And, in the end, I don't believe the author had anything like the > | > proper > | > | >> amount of time or a sufficient depth of testers to allow, on such a > | > | > massive > | > | >> pile of cobbled together "patches", anything like a decent margin > of > | > | > safety. > | > | >> And while a forum works well when building an app by committee, it > | does > | > | > NOT > | > | >> substitute for a manual of instructions, nor all the other usual > | items > | > | >> you > | > | >> see on an app's download page, like Min. Reqs., CAUTIONS, etc. I > | mean, > | > if > | > | >> the author KNOWS the app is going to choke and cause problems on > | anythi > | > ng > | > | >> but a new installation, why THAT info should be the title of the > | damned > | > | >> page, not some note buried in Comment 25. > | > | >> > | > | >> No, not only is this a dangerous abortion of an app for the casual > | > user, > | > | > it > | > | >> fails my own minimum requirements for any app worth a damn. My > | opinion > | > of > | > | >> those promoting it here is that they lack any sense of > responsibility > | > | > toward > | > | >> the innocents who come here looking for advice. I say SHAME ON YOU, > | one > | > | > and > | > | >> all. > | > | >> > | > | >> -- > | > | >> Gary S. Terhune > | > | >> MS-MVP Shell/User > | > | >> http://www.grystmill.com > | > | >> > | > | >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message > | > | > news:EppZj.89523$y05.52341@newsfe22.lga... > | > | >> > "J. P. Gilliver" <john.gilliver@baesystems.com> wrote in message > | > | >> > news:4835af64$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > | > | >> >> Gary S. Terhune wrote: > | > | >> >> > "Don Phillipson" <e925@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message > | > | >> >> [] > | > | >> >> >> Experts usually recommend that this be done every year or > | > | >> >> >> two. It takes less than an hour thus seems prerequisite > | before > | > | >> >> >> assuming hardware causes the problem in this PC (presumably > | > | >> >> >> 5 to 10 years old.) > | > | >> >> > > | > | >> >> > Pray tell, what "experts" recommend this habitual > reinstallation > | > of > | > | >> >> > Win98? That's a load of pure B.S. And, yes, installing Windows > | > takes > | > | >> >> > ~ 1 hour. But it can take days to finish the job properly. One > | > very, > | > | >> >> > very long day, at best. > | > | >> >> > | > | >> >> Hooray! I was going to say more or less the very same thing. > | > | >> >> > | > | >> >> As part of trying to get that microscope working, I used > | soporific's > | > | >> >> autopatcher - yes, you were all right to say be very careful > with > | > it: > | > | > it > | > | >> >> broke my PC [freezes during boot]. (Yes, I know it only does > | > patches. > | > | > All > | > | >> >> right, one of them broke it. Same end result.) Probably > | > irretrievable > | > | >> > broken > | > | >> >> now, due to the tinkering I've done to try to get it back, but > I'm > | > | >> >> very > | > | >> > loth > | > | >> >> to do a reinstall, as there are signs that my setup is still > there > | > | >> >> underneath: it (initially) would still boot into Safe Mode, for > | > | > example. > | > | >> >> (Now just gets as far as the background pattern in Safe Mode. > Can > | > | >> >> still > | > | >> > get > | > | >> >> to command prompt no problem.) > | > | >> >> > | > | >> >> Any suggestions (other than not be a silly boy again)? > | > | >> > > | > | >> > Is it any wonder that a user that couldn't or wouldn't verify > | > | >> > the microscope mfg's requirements for the OS also couldn't > | > | >> > or wouldn't bother to follow instructions regarding program > | > | >> > installation and then blames the utility's (AP) packager? ;^) > | > | >> > > | > | >> > Per the author's instructions, Auto-Patcher is supposed > | > | >> > to be applied to a fresh install of Windows 98 SE. Re: > | > | >> > The correct sequence is: > | > | >> > 1. Install Win98se > | > | >> > 2. Install Auto-Patcher and use it. > | > | >> > http://soporific.dsleague.com/main/?page_id=7 > | > | >> > > | > | >> > I've followed that recommendation and despite heavy usage > | > | >> > continue to not have the slightest conceivable issue with Auto- > | > | >> > Patcher, I've in fact had quite the exact opposite experience.
Guest . Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! How might a mere mortal possibly contest such a devastatingly delineated, fact filled, well referenced and reasoned rebuttal? "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:%238FKBrUvIHA.1688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > The acute observer would notice that I'm right. You're a weasel. The proof > lies in your contributions of today. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:shKZj.3$BK1.2@newsfe17.phx... > > Just more of your pathetically feeble attempts at > > "misinformation and misrepresentation". The astute > > observer will note how you conveniently and cowardly > > excised the vast majority of my germane remarks, which > > also included: "But I'm neither advocate nor critic per se, > > just passing along a utility that worked well for me. Though > > as always, caveat emptor, don't buy a pig in a poke, don't > > blindly accept advice from anonymous strangers and don't > > let anyone else do your thinking for you." > > > > As others have already paraphrased and would doubtlessly > > concur, you, in fact, are quite evidently and conspicuously > > an imbalanced, wretched and 'miserable soul' indeed. > > > > > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > > news:%23E$LzKTvIHA.5472@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > >> And to teach people this imperative, you deliberately advise them in such > >> ways as to cause them grief. Such a miserable soul. > >> > >> -- > >> Gary S. Terhune > >> MS-MVP Shell/User > >> http://www.grystmill.com > >> > >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:g5HZj.1386$JI2.544@newsfe13.lga... > >> > > >> > Blindly following ANYONE'S recommendations and > >> > allowing others do your thinking for you are tactics > >> > that are bound to eventually engender consequences.
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! Hey, the term "weasel", as applied to persons in a derogatory manner, is actually quite well-delineated, well-referenced meanings. I was simply being concise. In not one post of yours over the last two months is there ANY mention of what you describe below. Not even close, not until you were called out about the POS you're slogging. Then you started back-peddling. Unless you want to claim the posts of some other writer here? Perhaps your more normal alias? Up to you, but "Insignificant Speck", aka ".", is a lying weasel, and the proof is now well documented. You're a miserable, malicious Sophist. Disgusting creature. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:2KWZj.31$d41.1@newsfe16.phx... > How might a mere mortal possibly contest such a devastatingly > delineated, fact filled, well referenced and reasoned rebuttal? > > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message > news:%238FKBrUvIHA.1688@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> The acute observer would notice that I'm right. You're a weasel. The >> proof >> lies in your contributions of today. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:shKZj.3$BK1.2@newsfe17.phx... >> > Just more of your pathetically feeble attempts at >> > "misinformation and misrepresentation". The astute >> > observer will note how you conveniently and cowardly >> > excised the vast majority of my germane remarks, which >> > also included: "But I'm neither advocate nor critic per se, >> > just passing along a utility that worked well for me. Though >> > as always, caveat emptor, don't buy a pig in a poke, don't >> > blindly accept advice from anonymous strangers and don't >> > let anyone else do your thinking for you." >> > >> > As others have already paraphrased and would doubtlessly >> > concur, you, in fact, are quite evidently and conspicuously >> > an imbalanced, wretched and 'miserable soul' indeed. >> > >> > >> > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message >> > news:%23E$LzKTvIHA.5472@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> >> And to teach people this imperative, you deliberately advise them in > such >> >> ways as to cause them grief. Such a miserable soul. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Gary S. Terhune >> >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> >> >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message > news:g5HZj.1386$JI2.544@newsfe13.lga... >> >> > >> >> > Blindly following ANYONE'S recommendations and >> >> > allowing others do your thinking for you are tactics >> >> > that are bound to eventually engender consequences. > >
Guest MEB Posted May 24, 2008 Posted May 24, 2008 Re: Please help - Windows 98 SE freeze! "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:hIWZj.30$d41.22@newsfe16.phx... | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message | news:eDLvhEUvIHA.1768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... | > | > "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message news:88HZj.1387$JI2.412@newsfe13.lga... | > | "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message | > | news:%23AXjBMQvIHA.5584@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... | > | > Excuse me for butting in, but *I* did supply the warning in the | > | > post/discussion *warning* about installing these things in already | > updated | > | > systems. | > | > I personally HAVE tested numerous of these compilations, and DO warn | > | > concerning their use when such appears in this group. | > | > | > | > I agree, the works are at best "beta tests" as I have repeatedly | posted | > in | > | > this group; I also agree that the documentation is slim and poorly | > | > researched and presented.. I also would like to see a more extensive | > | review | > | > of these compilations. | > | > | > | > But I also see the potential value, for some, that these might | provide. | > | > However, I would also like to see the sites which provide these, to | also | > | > provide support forums for these updaters, where those with issues can | > | > address them without scorn. With Summaries and Warnings CLEARLY posted | > | > throughout the sites. | > | > CLEARLY, those who post that these are fail-safe or attempt to direct | > in | > | > the fashion, are failing to address the differing configurations of | the | > | > individual systems. They are also CLEARLY failing to address the | > differing | > | > applications which might be installed within those *unofficially* | > updated | > | > systems. | > | > MOST IMPORTANTLY, they also CLEARLY fail to address the additional | > | security | > | > risks and other issues which become part of this un-official updating. | > | > Many of these official updates can be modified to work within 9X, but | > for | > | > them to work safely [or what is purported as such in Microsoft | > | > environments], they NEED the other functions/services available within | > the | > | > OS for which they were originally intended. | > | > | > | > I have yet to find the sites which have setup proper testing | facilities | > | to | > | > test and attack these systems. I have yet to see the file and system | > error | > | > check reports. I have yet to find the sites which deal with the | > | > inter-relationships of these updates and the ramifications thereby | > | related.. | > | > As such, ALL usage of these unofficial updaters should be taken with | > | extreme | > | > caution and skepticism. | > | > | > | > Stating that "it works for me" means nothing and produces an air that | > | these | > | > are OKAY for everyone, which they are NOT.. | > | > | > | > -- | > | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com | > | > -- | > | | > | Sorry but as an attorney(?), I'd think that you would be | > | well aware that stating "X works for me" hardly constitutes | > | "it's okay for everyone" to a rational, responsible adult. | > | > | > And where in society do you find those illusive rational, responsible | > adults??? Are they on the endangered list, perhaps hidden in some dark | cave | > in some human preserve somewhere... | > | > If you bother to look at this world, with its UTUBE, MYSPACE, pundits, | > dating services, and all those other apparent schizophrenic activities, | > fostering unbased impressions and myth, just where do you think people | find | > their sensibilities to become responsible, rational adults... is it your | > contention that somehow this growing majority of people will, at some | time, | > get off their pharmaceuticals long enough to actually become such? | > | > -- | > MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com | | Society's ills can't justifiably be placed at my doorstep. | Please agan peruse what I've scribed and inform me, if | you would, where it is that I've acted irresponsibly. But | kindly don't confuse my truly commendable, volunteer, | humanitarian and helpful efforts at purging vermin and | other highly undesirables found in usenet newsgroups ;^) | | | > -- | > _________ Societies ills ARE the responsibility of those responsible, rational adults you mentioned. If you claim to be one of those, then any attempt to disclaim that responsibility, is an apparent admission that you are NOT one of those parties as you suggest. Attempting to purge such parties requires you revert to the same activities you are supposedly attempting to dissuade. No matter how well worded or how carefully one attempts to bring those parties activities to the forefront, one still assumes and accepts the demeanor of this unsocial behavior. Moreover, when one touts their own posts as examples of superior quality, they distinctly attempt to build their own self-worth and esteem. In contrast, one can suggest a review, but placing one's own "ranking" tends to suggest issues related to delusions of grandaur. Other's will place those either mentally or will at some point do so for the author. I'm not suggesting that personal attacks go unanswered, but to continue much beyond the initial response does cause others to question the ntegrity of the party. Think about it... -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com -- _________ | > | | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message | > | > news:%23W7tE1PvIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... | > | > | LOL! You can't decently defend one accusation I made. Look, just | > because | > | > it | > | > | hasn't caused YOU any problems, it HAS caused problems, as you've | seen | > | in | > | > | this group in just the past couple of days. And, pray tell, who else | > | here | > | > | has said anything negative about AP except me? How could I possibly | be | > | > | "relying solely on snippets and the barbs of others"? My opinions | are | > | > | entirely my own, you twit. | > | > | | > | > | I CERTAINLY read that page of "instructions" and it isn't anything | of | > | the | > | > | sort. I CERTAINLY, reviewed the forum to a fair extent, and it was | > | totally | > | > | non-informative about the app except to prove that lots of people | have | > | > | problems with it and they seem to be mostly problems of | > incompatibility | > | > with | > | > | other apps and (as seen in this group) hardware. That indicates | > | > insufficient | > | > | testing. It CERTAINLY caused at least two people in this group grief | > | when | > | > | they tried it, with problems you apparently don't know the answer | to, | > | and | > | > in | > | > | one case will apparently require a total rebuild to "fix" it. I | > | CERTAINLY | > | > | *have* downloaded it and looked into it, but I don't have a machine | I | > | feel | > | > | like rebuilding right now, so I'd be stupid to actually run it. And | > | other | > | > | than that one "comment", I DON'T see ANYWHERE where it says, "Only | run | > | > this | > | > | on a fresh install of Windows 98." You'd think that was rather an | > | > important | > | > | thing for the new user to know. But, of course, I've read a lot, | > | > everything | > | > | available except not ALL of the dozens of pages of MSFN forum, and | > | that's | > | > | the only place that little rule is mentioned, so I think YOU are the | > one | > | > | that's off the wall and that a fresh install isn't supposed to be a | > | > | requirement at all. Hey, if you really don't know what you're | talking | > | > about, | > | > | you should keep your yap shut. | > | > | | > | > | The whole IDEA of Auto-Patcher is wrong-headed and it's full of | > | potential | > | > | problems because of all the unofficial updates and attempts at | > building | > | 98 | > | > | patches from XP versions, but even then, it's not ready for | > | distribution. | > | > | It's barely reached Beta stage. Responsible people generally do not | > | > | recommend Beta products to others. | > | > | | > | > | NOT ONLY WILL I NOT USE Auto-Patcher, I WILL SLAM IT AND BAD MOUTH | > | ANYONE | > | > | WHO EVEN RECOMMENDS IT, now and for the foreseeable future. It's a | big | > a | > | > | pile of crap as I've seen in a long time. Like something Symantec | > might | > | > | vomit out. | > | > | | > | > | Lastly, quit brown-nosing me and go find someone else to pretend | > you're | > | > the | > | > | equal of. You're an ignorant cuss, enamored of a juvenile | circle-jerk | > | > called | > | > | "Auto-Patcher". If you want a metaphor, try Communism, the "peoples' | > | > party" | > | > | Valhalla that never managed to accomplish anything but evil. | > | > | | > | > | Let me put it more simply -- If people want Windows XP (or Vista), | > they | > | > | should go out and buy them, instead of trying to make Windows 98 | into | > | > | something it can never decently be. | > | > | | > | > | -- | > | > | Gary S. Terhune | > | > | MS-MVP Shell/User | > | > | http://www.grystmill.com | > | > | | > | > | "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message | > | > news:qoCZj.89588$y05.29430@newsfe22.lga... | > | > | > Don't like it? Don't use it, simple as that; albeit your "review" | > | > | > is tantamount to an evaluation of a book where the critic has | > | > | > not only not read the work (let alone perused the Cliff Notes) | > | > | > but instead haughtily berates those that have relying solely on | > | > | > snippets and the barbs of others. In any case, to each his own. | > | > | > | > | > | > "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message | > | > | > news:%23oHcbvOvIHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... | > | > | >> Would be nice if the author could bother to put a real front page | | > on | > | > that | > | > | >> thing. Would be nice if the people slogging this product in this | > | group, | > | > | >> along with the rest of the author's cohort, could be bothered to | > | > provide | > | > | > the | > | > | >> important links regarding it's use. So far, I have a link to MSFN | > | that | > | > | > looks | > | > | >> just like any other product development discussion -- two | freakin' | > | > years | > | > | >> worth. A new user is supposed to slog through that to find a list | > of | > | > | >> instructions? A new user, in order to avoid SERIOUS FOUL-UPS, is | > | > supposed | > | > | > to | > | > | >> do this? | > | > | >> | > | > | >> OK, so I go to soporific.com, expecting there'll be instructions | > | there. | > | > | >> Nope, just list of folders. So it's guessing game time. OK, I'll | > | click | > | > on | > | > | >> Main. Hmm.... bunch of political blather... Oh, there it is in | the | > | > upper | > | > | >> right corner, Ok... Whaddya know, it's the page that you so | kindly | > | > linked | > | > | >> to, the one nobody else who slogs the app here seems to know | about. | > | > | >> | > | > | >> Just a long list of 47 "Comments", one of which, by golly, | suggests | > | > that | > | > | > my | > | > | >> Unofficial Time Zones Update package be included. I assume it | > wasn't, | > | > | > since | > | > | >> I haven't heard from the author. (Oh, and down around "COMMENT" | 26 | > is | > | > | >> your | > | > | >> "Instruction". Sorry, but that doesn't qualify as an | "Instruction". | > | > | >> | > | > | >> So, maybe the app is useful, and maybe it is even a God Send for | IT | > | > | > people. | > | > | >> (But I think people who try to turn Windows 98 into Windows XP | have | > | > | >> something missing in their soul.) But it was the HEIGHT of | > | > | > irresponsibility | > | > | >> for anyone in this group to be promoting it, because frankly, it | > | isn't | > | > | >> finished, and/or they don't really know anything about it, and/or | > if | > | > they | > | > | > | > | > | > DO | > | > | >> know anything about it, they don't apparently know the most | > important | > | > | >> thing -- AP is only to be applied to a fresh install. | > | > | >> | > | > | >> And, in the end, I don't believe the author had anything like the | > | > proper | > | > | >> amount of time or a sufficient depth of testers to allow, on such | a | > | > | > massive | > | > | >> pile of cobbled together "patches", anything like a decent margin | > of | > | > | > safety. | > | > | >> And while a forum works well when building an app by committee, | it | > | does | > | > | > NOT | > | > | >> substitute for a manual of instructions, nor all the other usual | > | items | > | > | >> you | > | > | >> see on an app's download page, like Min. Reqs., CAUTIONS, etc. I | > | mean, | > | > if | > | > | >> the author KNOWS the app is going to choke and cause problems on | > | anythi | > | > ng | > | > | >> but a new installation, why THAT info should be the title of the | > | damned | > | > | >> page, not some note buried in Comment 25. | > | > | >> | > | > | >> No, not only is this a dangerous abortion of an app for the | casual | > | > user, | > | > | > it | > | > | >> fails my own minimum requirements for any app worth a damn. My | > | opinion | > | > of | > | > | >> those promoting it here is that they lack any sense of | > responsibility | > | > | > toward | > | > | >> the innocents who come here looking for advice. I say SHAME ON | YOU, | > | one | > | > | > and | > | > | >> all. | > | > | >> | > | > | >> -- | > | > | >> Gary S. Terhune | > | > | >> MS-MVP Shell/User | > | > | >> http://www.grystmill.com | > | > | >> | > | > | >> "." <.@dot.com> wrote in message | > | > | > news:EppZj.89523$y05.52341@newsfe22.lga... | > | > | >> > "J. P. Gilliver" <john.gilliver@baesystems.com> wrote in | message | > | > | >> > news:4835af64$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... | > | > | >> >> Gary S. Terhune wrote: | > | > | >> >> > "Don Phillipson" <e925@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message | > | > | >> >> [] | > | > | >> >> >> Experts usually recommend that this be done every year or | > | > | >> >> >> two. It takes less than an hour thus seems prerequisite | > | before | > | > | >> >> >> assuming hardware causes the problem in this PC (presumably | > | > | >> >> >> 5 to 10 years old.) | > | > | >> >> > | > | > | >> >> > Pray tell, what "experts" recommend this habitual | > reinstallation | > | > of | > | > | >> >> > Win98? That's a load of pure B.S. And, yes, installing | Windows | > | > takes | > | > | >> >> > ~ 1 hour. But it can take days to finish the job properly. | One | > | > very, | > | > | >> >> > very long day, at best. | > | > | >> >> | > | > | >> >> Hooray! I was going to say more or less the very same thing. | > | > | >> >> | > | > | >> >> As part of trying to get that microscope working, I used | > | soporific's | > | > | >> >> autopatcher - yes, you were all right to say be very careful | > with | > | > it: | > | > | > it | > | > | >> >> broke my PC [freezes during boot]. (Yes, I know it only does | > | > patches. | > | > | > All | > | > | >> >> right, one of them broke it. Same end result.) Probably | > | > irretrievable | > | > | >> > broken | > | > | >> >> now, due to the tinkering I've done to try to get it back, but | > I'm | > | > | >> >> very | > | > | >> > loth | > | > | >> >> to do a reinstall, as there are signs that my setup is still | > there | > | > | >> >> underneath: it (initially) would still boot into Safe Mode, | for | > | > | > example. | > | > | >> >> (Now just gets as far as the background pattern in Safe Mode. | > Can | > | > | >> >> still | > | > | >> > get | > | > | >> >> to command prompt no problem.) | > | > | >> >> | > | > | >> >> Any suggestions (other than not be a silly boy again)? | > | > | >> > | > | > | >> > Is it any wonder that a user that couldn't or wouldn't verify | > | > | >> > the microscope mfg's requirements for the OS also couldn't | > | > | >> > or wouldn't bother to follow instructions regarding program | > | > | >> > installation and then blames the utility's (AP) packager? ;^) | > | > | >> > | > | > | >> > Per the author's instructions, Auto-Patcher is supposed | > | > | >> > to be applied to a fresh install of Windows 98 SE. Re: | > | > | >> > The correct sequence is: | > | > | >> > 1. Install Win98se | > | > | >> > 2. Install Auto-Patcher and use it. | > | > | >> > http://soporific.dsleague.com/main/?page_id=7 | > | > | >> > | > | > | >> > I've followed that recommendation and despite heavy usage | > | > | >> > continue to not have the slightest conceivable issue with Auto- | > | > | >> > Patcher, I've in fact had quite the exact opposite experience. | |
Recommended Posts