install printer drivers

C

Claudehl@aol.com

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

On Aug 19, 8:07�pm, thanatoid <wait...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:

> I like programs which do not install ANYTHING anywhere except
> their directory and do not write anything to the registry. BTW,
> a friend gave me an old classic: "The Mother of all Windows
> Books" and I read about 80% of it while sitting on the john. It
> was written for Win 3.1. Did you know the an early version of
> the registry already existed in 3.1 ? I never noticed it /then/.
> Makes me want to install 3.11 on the old 486/66 I have siting
> around just to check it out.
>


Yes, it has a registry, working in conjunction with the [extensions]
and [embedding] sections in WIN.INI and a REGEDIT program to play with
it (use /V). A lot easier to figure out than the later incarnations.

But why go back to a 486? Unlike Win 95, Win 3.x doesn't even have a
2GHz CPU ceiling, so the sky is the limit, or available harware
drivers, whatever comes first ;-)

Claude
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B00171A21BF9thanexit@66.250.146.158>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
[]
>I think you're right. Of course, 8.3 file names were never a
>REAL limitation, just difficult for the conceptually-impaired.


Indeed. I tend still to use them - to the bemusement of colleagues.
[]
>> (Which
>> reminds me: at least the file load/save window in 3.x was a
>> bit more intuitive. The file load and save windows, in '9x

[]
>Frankly, it's been so long since I messed with MS File Manager
>and 3.1 that I can't remember enough to understand what you
>mean.


The file load/save window in '3.1 (which still appears under '9x at
times, e. g. when you're telling it where drivers are) has a sort of
directory tree on the right of the window.
[]
>> I must admit that there's an add-on to Alt-Tab in XP
>> (Microsoft produced but not official - bit like TweakUI, in
>> fact I think it is called a powertoy) which I like, which
>> gives you a miniaturised screenshot of the tasks you're
>> switching through rather than just an icon - useful if
>> you've got more than one instance of the same thing
>> running.

>
>In 95 (I just switched off my 98 computer) there is a line of
>text under the icons which tells you exactly which of the
>several instances of the same icon you are about to end up in.


The basic XP one is similar (slightly improved IIRR); the powertoy
add-on does IMO add something useful.
[]
>Yes, I guess the bottom line is XP came with a huge amount of
>drivers for almost everything, while with 9x you often have
>to/had to search for them, and needless to say a lot of
>manufacturers do not even provide them anymore.


The universal USB driver for '98 does work well when installed as part
of a fresh install (e. g. soporific's UBCD or "Windows 98 tenth
anniversary edition"); I've installed it on two systems now, and both
recognise any USB stick I've tried in them. I've tried a universal USB
driver (not sure if the same one) on not-from-scratch systems, and it
has caused problems ("hosed" them GST would say).
[]
>more than enough. I /will/ admit to DL'g cracked programs from
>various sources - I am not going to spend $300 on a program just
>because I am bored and curious about what exactly it is that it
>does. In most cases they were deleted within 10 minutes anyway.
>I am not a professional pirate, I have bought many programs, and
>I have paid for freeware when I though the author deserved it,
>more than once.


Snap.
[]
>heard about. 99% of home users don't even know how to set tabs
>in Word, but they have been brainwashed to HAVE to have Office.


It occurred to me recently that tab is just another term - along with
carriage return and line feed - that comes from typewriters, and this is
not known by the majority these days.
[]
>Just did. Looks good, small etc. I do NOT like "Automatically
>search your hard disk for image files" - I am capable of doing


Ditto; I don't think I've ever used that function. However, I see no
reason to knock it - it might be useful to some.

>this myself, and "Supports MS Plus! scaling" - I don't know what
>it is but I don't like the sound of it. Plus! was always just
>stupid IMO.


Indeed. (But may have been fashionable when Panorama was written.)
>
>Wow. Just checked DL sizes and 'wallpaper changer' is even
>smaller! And it has some GREAT options. Check it out!


Post marked "keep" to do so.
[]
>I miss Europe - I think. Haven't been there once since 1972.
>It's changed an awful lot I'm sure, probably more than North
>America. Maybe not.


Well, I've never been to NA, so I guess we're even (-:.
[]
>I agree. And I once did a search on the guy who sold QDOS to
>Gates for 50 grand, and he has a job at MS and appears quite
>happy even though he never got to be the richest man in the
>world.


Some of us are happy within moderate means.
[]
>Oh, that is clear. You can't wear 2 pairs of shoes at the same
>time... Well, maybe you /could/, but you know what I mean...
>
>I am also sure that programs which dump stuff into win\sys and
>refistry will have to be installed again for XP. Some of them
>anyway... I'll know soon, I hope.


Yes, I expect so.
>
>I like programs which do not install ANYTHING anywhere except
>their directory and do not write anything to the registry. BTW,


Likewise. I actually liked the idea of .dlls - common code - when they
were first mooted, but the original concept seems to have been well
broken. Plus modern storage costs have reduced the need.

>a friend gave me an old classic: "The Mother of all Windows
>Books" and I read about 80% of it while sitting on the john. It
>was written for Win 3.1. Did you know the an early version of
>the registry already existed in 3.1 ? I never noticed it /then/.


(I think it might have been 3.11, but yes, I did. As you say, it never
caused much in the way of problems then. A predecessor, of course, was
the win.ini file.)
[]
>>>I doubt I will ever own a digital camera. I did a lot of
>>>35mm photography when I was in my late teens and 20's, but
>>>the last time I took any photos and enjoyed doing it was
>>>about 20 years

>>
>> Do get a cheap one and play a bit - the enjoyment comes
>> back, enhanced by (a) instant review (within the limits of
>> the display) and (b) no worries about the cost of film.

>
>I have no family or friends to speak of; well, the total of
>those 2 groups of people in my immediate vicinity is about 3,
>and none that I would want to take pictures of. I hate where I


Flowers can be most satisfying.

>live and feel very self-conscious with a camera no matter
>/where/ I am and whatever I am doing. I miss the old days when I
>used to run around with 16mm film cameras or big video
>camcorders and didn't care... Alas...


Public attitudes to photography - not least by the authorities - have
changed; you're either a pedo or a terr'st or both, nowadays )-:.
>
>> Oh,
>> and unless you're going to print things out on A4, don't
>> use maximum resolution all the time!

>
>Even if I had any pictures to take, I probably would not print
>them. For one, I have a B&W laser printer and I also believe in
>paperless computing. My first laser cartridge lasted 8 years!
>I'm not lying!


My cartridges tend to dry out.
>
>> I still use my old -
>> and first, really - Fuji 0.8 megapixel one, and most of the
>> time don't feel the need for anything else. (After all, how

[]
>It astounds me that you can get a 10 megapixel camera for a
>couple of hundred dollars now... 12 years ago 2 megapixels was


I had a flyer for (among other things) a 8+M one for 50 or 60 quid the
other day.
[]
>Anyone using a digital zoom is just dumb, although once you have
>10 megapixels to work with, I imagine the results can be quite


As you say, if using the camera set to save at less than its maximum
resolution (which most users don't even know how to do), I guess the
zoom is useful. Pity most of them don't tell you when you've reached its
limit, though.
[]
>waste of time IMO. I see ads for paperback-sized consumer
>camcorders with a 40x optical zoom and I just can NOT believe


They _are_ pretty good!
[]
>What I hate about the digital cameras are all the stupid add-ons
>- image effects, mp3 playback, video recording, "pretty" case
>colors, etc. Give me a 10x optical zoom with a good wide and a
>macro, and forget everything else! But I really can't see ever
>getting one.


Just get a cheap one, to play with a bit.
[]
[Acronis]
>No floppies, but you have to make a bootable recovery CD once
>you install it, and then you're set.


If, as I say, you have a suitable BIOS.
[]
>> early Word, too [I normally use Word 97 Burgundy].)

>
>I use metapad lite. It IGNORES the biggest keyboard curse of all
>(and I am NOT talking about the fact the keyboard layout we all
>use is what it is because they designed it that way so it would
>be MOST difficult to type quickly - since early typewriters
>jammed a lot). I am talking about the insert/overwrite toggle!!!
>AAAUUGH!!!!!


Did I already tell you about ITK (http://www.mlin.net/misc.shtml)? I use
Notepad+ for text files.
[]
>> Basically, you just run it from a working
>> system, tell it where to put the saved files (it asks; if I
>> was doing it now on this machine, I'd specify
>> C:\ERD\20080817.000 - keeping to 8.3 filenames of course,
>> though it doesn't force you to). If I then wanted to
>> restore to how it is now, I'd start up in DOS, navigate to
>> that directory, and type erd, and it would restore things.
>> (It puts a little executable with the saved files.) If you
>> haven't used it, try it, it won't break anything (assuming
>> you've got a '95 disc - I'm not sure it's on the '98 one).

>
>Yup, still have the original OEM that came with this computer -
>I even made a backup of it! But I would probably just use XTree
>to do what you are describing. I still use it when the registry
>gets bloated and I need to put an older one in, etc.


Have a look at ERD/ERU - it's under others/misc, or misc/others, or
something like that, on the '95 disc.
>
><SNIP>
>
>No word from Acronis yet. May never hear from them. Let me know
>how that free program worked out.


Will if I find my tuit ...
>
>Cheers.
>
>

I think XP is now in the same position as '9x: refusing to die. The new
crop of "netbooks", started by the Asus Eees (which have made Linux
mainstream, though the users don't know - or care! - what OS they run)
have developed to cover models with, for example, 80G drives, but still
in a tiny machine (no optical drive), and these seem to be keeping XP
alive. Have a look at
http://www.mobilecomputermag.co.uk/20080813803/where-to-find-all-of-mobile-computer-s-netbook-reviews.html
for a few reviews.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

"I never trust a woman until she rejects me" - Woody Allen, 1999
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B1D17797AD8Dthanexit@66.250.146.158>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
[]
>Good point. Ah... the good old days. I MAY have already mentioned it,
>but did you know the qwerty layout is what it is because the earliest
>typewriters jammed a lot so they made the layout AS DIFFICULT as they
>could so people would be forced to type REALLY slow?! And we're STILL


ISTR reading somewhere that some of that is an urban myth - that it was
indeed designed to get round problems with mechanical typewriter keys
jamming, but not actually designed to make it as slow as possible. (The
positioning of the commonest letters does tend to support this. Plus the
fact that it is different in different languages - I think it is AZERTY
in German, for example.)
[]
>>>Wow. Just checked DL sizes and 'wallpaper changer' is even
>>>smaller! And it has some GREAT options. Check it out!

>>
>> Post marked "keep" to do so.

>
>Obviously, I never read the whole post, just start replying. Maybe I
>should try it someday. Sigh.


Oh, I wouldn't bother - I do the same as you, just reply in a
stream-of-consciousness way!
[]
>> Likewise. I actually liked the idea of .dlls - common code
>> - when they were first mooted, but the original concept
>> seems to have been well broken. Plus modern storage costs
>> have reduced the need.

>
>I actually never /quite/ understood the concept and functionality of
>DLL's, but they sure appear to be a rather flexible extension. I have a
>collection of icons for my desktop (some original program icons are
>just HORRID or simply make NO sense) and I have it saved as a DLL.


Well, my understanding of the idea behind DLLs was that lots of prog.s
use certain common routines (e. g. box/window drawing ones), and at the
time it made sense to put these into a common library, thus making the
size of the actual executables for applications smaller (and possibly
faster); this was significant at the time, when disc space was at a
premium at least to some extent, and also download sizes benefitted from
limitation.
[]
>I REALLY think the 3 ini files were just fine. The registry is such as


Yes. Actually, I preferred prog.s that used their own .ini file, kept in
their own directory.

>horrible agglomeration of useless crap - who needs ALL the time zones
>in the world if they KNOW they will never live anywhere else? And


Agreed.

>that's not even the worst of it. From what I have read recently, it
>seems an awful lot of it has to do with the way MS programs
>(specifically within Office) communicate with each other and exchange
>information - something which is of ABSOLUTELY no use to me personally.


Yes, Office seems to be almost an adjunct to the OS - not quite to the
extent that IE is, in that the Office bits seem only to affect other
parts of Office in the main, but I know what you mean; I've even found
cases where the only way I could see to change something in one part of
Office was to change it in another part (usually Word).
[]
>>>> Do get a cheap one and play a bit - the enjoyment comes

[]
>> Flowers can be most satisfying.

[]
>plants in general. But I appreciate the encouragement.


Good (-:. Well, other small things then.
[]
>photography you might consider a color laser printer. They have finally


I have access to an hp 4500N; very cranky and very slow (especially if
I'm the one who has to wake it up from its slumbers), but it does
produce lovely output.

>come down to a reasonable price level - and needless to say will be
>even cheaper a year from now.


I don't do that much photography, and what I do I nearly always view on
screen.
[]
>Crazy, isn't it? And the MAIN effect of such huge image sizes (in an
>average user's life) are 20MB email attachments of boring relatives. No
>one knows how (or cares) to resize. Sigh.


Agreed. (Or how to use their camera at less than max. size in the first
place.)
[]
>> Just get a cheap one, to play with a bit.

>
>No, there's no point. I NEVER touch my two 35mm cameras, and like I


No, but at least part of the reason for that is the knowledge of the
inherent delay due to processing. If you like instead, have a play with
a cheap USB microscope.
[]
>> [Acronis]
>>>No floppies, but you have to make a bootable recovery CD
>>>once you install it, and then you're set.

>>
>> If, as I say, you have a suitable BIOS.

>
>Actually, during my 2 weeks of computer hell, I found out how it works
>(because I almost destroyed my computer). It creates a little directory
>with custom boot info which (if necessary, perhaps) allows it to boot


Presumably on the HD, so no good if the HD actually dies, rather than
just getting scrambled.

>from the CD, loading the drivers etc., I imagine, and deletes it when
>you restart after the image restore. My 11 year old computer
>(temporarily "sitting idle", so to speak) after I went a /little/ too
>far with it, has a boot from CDROM option in its 14 year old BIOS, so I
>think it's possible on almost any machine except XT's.


Hmm, I think I have seen ones considerably more modern than XTs which
didn't have the from-CD boot option, but probably any one which anyone
would bother to work with these days would have it (maybe anything
Pentium on - certainly I'd expect it in anything P-II on).
>
>>>> early Word, too [I normally use Word 97 Burgundy].)

>
>No idea what the "Burgundy" thing is.


An OEM one I picked up somewhere - basically Office '97 with updates;
it's actually dates '98 I think. It is a genuine Microsoft product.
[]
>Anyway, I've been to Mike Lin's site a few times. A few of his utils
>worked perfectly, some did NOTHING. Isn't ITK the one that disables the
>damn insert/overwrite thing? It did NOT work on my machine!


It just makes a bleep whenever you hit the insert/overtype key, that's
all - rather like the "toggle keys" for the three lock keys which are
part of W'9x anyway, but for some reason hidden away under
"Accessibility" or something like that. (I find them useful, as I find
it very easy to hit caps lock without meaning to, and this at least
tells me I've done so.)
[]
>> Have a look at ERD/ERU - it's under others/misc, or
>> misc/others, or something like that, on the '95 disc.

>
>I have and it did not inspire confidence. Anyway, Acronis takes care of
>everything. They have not replied to me and apparently could not care
>less so if you like I will post a copy of my old small and perfectly
>bug-free version for you somewhere with my serial.


Far be it from me to encourage illegal activities ... (-:
[]
>I hate laptops. The keyboard (Fn key, no number keypad, 4 functions per
>key, etc.) and the mouse "substitutes" would drive me even more insane
>than I already am. I realize many people HAVE to have them for work or
>school. I am glad I am not one of them. I LIKE my desk!


I agree with you about the Fn keys; I stick to this laptop because it
has he sixpack and arrows-T as more or less as they are on a fullsize
kbd. I thought I'd never get the hang of a touchpad, either, but I have,
and now use it as easily as a mouse (it's easier for some things, and a
mouse wins for some things). I certainly don't think I'd get on with
those rubbery things that stick out of they keyboard - I didn't realise
they were actually a sort of mouse for ages, I thought they were just a
screen-protecting bump!
>
>Anyway, it took three days and a fantastic tiny utility called
>w2fix.exe to get me on BB with my "other" (now "this") 2GHz 98SELite
>machine. Since I /never/ intended to use it for internet, it did not
>have any network or dial-up components installed, and I needed to DL


My main desktop machine has never been online since I last rebuilt it
(after I replaced the mobo/proc/RAM after a mishap, some years ago). I
BB (and, to be honest, do a lot else) from this 400MHz 128M laptop.

>those at a friend's house and install them, and then it turned out my
>whole winsock/DUN thing was screwed up. The 60KB w2fix.exe program
>fixed it like magic. After 3 hours on the phone with BB support and
>them telling my I had to reinstall the whole OS (right!), next day I
>found that tiny program, ran it, and was online instantly! In fact, at


Does w2fix.exe _only_ fix online things, or - as its name suggests -
does it fix other things?

>512kbps I am FASTER (I get about 450-500kbps) than my friend who has a
>wireless 1GHz connection and barely manages 300kbps! (I have NO
>problems with wires.)


Me neither. (A wireless link is only as good as the wired link to the
wireless router; an ultrafast wireless link makes no difference at all,
unless you're transferring big files between _local_ computers.)
[]
>--
>[from a recent mental conversation]
>
>thanatoid:
>So why did you decide you wanted broadband after all your
>endless babbling about how no one except DVD pirates really
>needs it?
>
>thanatoid:
>My ISP is offering it for less than I am paying for dial-up now


It's getting that way here - pay-as-you-go dialup costs between 1.20 and
3 pounds an hour, so it isn't difficult (especially at dialup speeds) to
clock up the 6 to 10 pounds a month bottom-end BB costs.
(All-you-can-eat dialup, for the few people who might use it, already
costs more.)

>AND the offer includes some other very attractive rate
>reductions in the basic phone service charges. And I decided I
>want to read my e-mail faster :)


You say that in jest, but with the already-discussed tendency of people
to put unnecessarily huge attachments on (and/or to add video), there is
some truth in it!
>
>(to be continued)


In the next thrilling instalment ...
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

Electricians do it 'till it Hz.
 
T

thanatoid

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:OuzqJwTYWv0IFwIw@soft255.demon.co.uk:

<SNIP>

> ISTR reading somewhere that some of that is an urban myth -
> that it was indeed designed to get round problems with
> mechanical typewriter keys jamming, but not actually
> designed to make it as slow as possible. (The positioning
> of the commonest letters does tend to support this. Plus
> the fact that it is different in different languages - I
> think it is AZERTY in German, for example.)


Well, making it slow would prevent jamming, wouldn't it? 6 of
one and half-dozen of the other, methinks. Still, it could be a
myth, it just seemed like one of those interesting/crazy items
from the history of advancement of the civilization so it stuck
in my mind. WHO knows what the truth about ANYTHING is.

<SNIP>

> Yes. Actually, I preferred prog.s that used their own .ini
> file, kept in their own directory.


There are still some programs which keep /everything/ in their
own directory - and that's the best way. INI's /could/ all go in
the windows dir which would make backing them up a little
simpler - just copying all *.ini files to a backup from one
directory instead from 20 or 50 or a 100.

<SNIP>

> I don't do that much photography, and what I do I nearly
> always view on screen.


I only have a b&w laser, and I almost never print anything.
Early on I printed some manuals (when programs still included
manuals!) but now I turn the thing on MAYBE once every 6 weeks
to print out an email for my mother or something.

I greatly believe in being "paperless". I would LOVE to put all
the news snips and misc. stuff I tore out of magazines and
newspapers over 30 years on my HD, but the time and effort
required will probably ensure that it never happens - not to
mention I am not that interested in the stuff anymore. (It
/would/ make moving a lot easier, but I don't intend to move
again, either, let alone with all my crap.)

>>>>No floppies, but you have to make a bootable recovery CD
>>>>once you install it, and then you're set.
>>>
>>> If, as I say, you have a suitable BIOS.


Well, practically speaking, I think all BIOS's in use support
that.

>>Actually, during my 2 weeks of computer hell, I found out
>>how it works (because I almost destroyed my computer). It
>>creates a little directory with custom boot info which (if
>>necessary, perhaps) allows it to boot

>
> Presumably on the HD, so no good if the HD actually dies,
> rather than just getting scrambled.


After installing Acronis, you make an Acronis Rescue Boot CD,
which has the program on it, boot from it, and then just put the
CD(s) with the last image in afterwards. No problem even if the
HD is dead. You put in a new drive and have the same C: that you
did before. Of course, backing up data on other partitions is
another matter, but Acronis allows you to back up any partition
and restore it to any other partition or HD. It allows you to
resize partitions at the same time if required (although I
believe the D: etc. partitions better be empty, it's not a
substitute for a true partition manager or just using fdisk
judiciously when setting up a machine).

<SNIP>

>>Isn't ITK the
>>one that disables the damn insert/overwrite thing? It did
>>NOT work on my machine!

>
> It just makes a bleep whenever you hit the insert/overtype
> key, that's all


Ahh, that's why it "didn't work" - I have all sounds turned off!

> - rather like the "toggle keys" for the
> three lock keys which are part of W'9x anyway, but for some
> reason hidden away under "Accessibility" or something like
> that. (I find them useful, as I find it very easy to hit
> caps lock without meaning to, and this at least tells me
> I've done so.)


I didn't know about this feature - will have to look it up. That
means installing accessibility options and sticking the 98 CD in
the drive again... The torture NEVER stops, does it... Actually,
all my text editors change type case very easily, so caps lock
hasn't been much trouble... But just yesterday I was reminded of
WHY I use Metapad while writing something in another editor.
What a drag!

>>if you like I will post a
>>copy of my old small and perfectly bug-free version for you
>>somewhere with my serial.

>
> Far be it from me to encourage illegal activities ... (-:


Well, it WAS given away for free with a magazine and they only
wanted you to go to the site to get the serial so they could
send you emails about new versions etc, which I opted out of
immediately and never heard from them again.

Anyway, seriously, just let me know.

>>I hate laptops.


<SNIP>

> I agree with you about the Fn keys; I stick to this laptop
> because it has he sixpack and arrows-T as more or less as
> they are on a fullsize kbd. I thought I'd never get the
> hang of a touchpad, either, but I have, and now use it as
> easily as a mouse (it's easier for some things, and a mouse
> wins for some things). I certainly don't think I'd get on
> with those rubbery things that stick out of they keyboard -
> I didn't realise they were actually a sort of mouse for
> ages, I thought they were just a screen-protecting bump!


That makes sense, actually! They ARE horrible, and they break
off. And IBM/Lenovo STILL put them on the machines, although I
believe they have added the little rectangular pad, at least.
Anyway, I am reasonably certain I will never ever own a laptop.
OTOH, small (or big) mouses (mice?) can be plugged into any
laptop. And people seem to carry them around in big bags anyway,
so there's space for lots of junk.

>>Anyway, it took three days and a fantastic tiny utility
>>called w2fix.exe to get me on BB with my "other" (now
>>"this") 2GHz 98SELite machine. Since I /never/ intended to
>>use it for internet, it did not have any network or dial-up
>>components installed, and I needed to DL

>
> My main desktop machine has never been online since I last
> rebuilt it (after I replaced the mobo/proc/RAM after a
> mishap, some years ago). I BB (and, to be honest, do a lot
> else) from this 400MHz 128M laptop.


No one needs anything else unless they are heavily into CAD or
multimedia or gaming.

<SNIP>

> Does w2fix.exe _only_ fix online things, or - as its name
> suggests - does it fix other things?


I believe the name stands for winsock2 fix. It doesn't do
anything else - it does ONE thing, PERFECTLY. It was like
witnessing a miracle.
I should mention it's for 98SE only. I found a few other
programs for 95-XP but never needed to try them. They probably
work fine too.

>>512kbps I am FASTER (I get about 450-500kbps) than my
>>friend who has a wireless 1GHz connection and barely
>>manages 300kbps! (I have NO problems with wires.)

>
> Me neither. (A wireless link is only as good as the wired
> link to the wireless router; an ultrafast wireless link
> makes no difference at all, unless you're transferring big
> files between _local_ computers.) []


People just like to have the latest and snazziest, even if it
decreases performance/usability. Insane. The main computer of
the 3 he has at home - where the wireless router is plugged in -
can't even get on the net at all. Ridiculous. It's a Sony Vaio
XP machine and it's slower than my 166. It has NEVER been
"maintained" or cleaned up or even defragged I believe - and
it's about 5 or 6 years old. (Needless to say, it has the
teletubbies wallpaper.)

t.

--
Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the
votes decide everything.
- Josef Stalin
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B2081B367A9Dthanexit@66.250.146.158>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
[]
>> ISTR reading somewhere that some of that is an urban myth -
>> that it was indeed designed to get round problems with
>> mechanical typewriter keys jamming, but not actually
>> designed to make it as slow as possible. (The positioning
>> of the commonest letters does tend to support this. Plus
>> the fact that it is different in different languages - I
>> think it is AZERTY in German, for example.)

>
>Well, making it slow would prevent jamming, wouldn't it? 6 of


Yes, but there are/were other ways to stop it jamming that _didn't_
involve slowing it down - moving the commonest letters so they weren't
too close to each other, I guess.
[]
>> Yes. Actually, I preferred prog.s that used their own .ini
>> file, kept in their own directory.

>
>There are still some programs which keep /everything/ in their
>own directory - and that's the best way. INI's /could/ all go in
>the windows dir which would make backing them up a little
>simpler - just copying all *.ini files to a backup from one
>directory instead from 20 or 50 or a 100.


Agreed on all you say.
>
><SNIP>
>
>> I don't do that much photography, and what I do I nearly
>> always view on screen.

>
>I only have a b&w laser, and I almost never print anything.


So, a simple camera (and/or microscope) would be some fun for you. Just
have a play!
[]
>I greatly believe in being "paperless". I would LOVE to put all
>the news snips and misc. stuff I tore out of magazines and
>newspapers over 30 years on my HD, but the time and effort
>required will probably ensure that it never happens - not to
>mention I am not that interested in the stuff anymore. (It


You are me. Again. (And mp3ing my records/CDs/etc., and scanning all my
old slides/prints ...)

>/would/ make moving a lot easier, but I don't intend to move
>again, either, let alone with all my crap.)


Ditto. One move after 20 years did show how much junk I have - I've made
one room here the junk room, but much of what's in there hasn't been
accessed since I moved in (over a year now), so I really ought to throw
some of it out ...
[]
>After installing Acronis, you make an Acronis Rescue Boot CD,
>which has the program on it, boot from it, and then just put the
>CD(s) with the last image in afterwards. No problem even if the
>HD is dead. You put in a new drive and have the same C: that you


Ah, I assumed it'd be something like that. Does it actually boot some
form of Linux? Is it able to handle (recreate) NTFS drives? Can it read
USB HDs/USB CDs?
[]
>>>Isn't ITK the
>>>one that disables the damn insert/overwrite thing? It did
>>>NOT work on my machine!

>>
>> It just makes a bleep whenever you hit the insert/overtype
>> key, that's all

>
>Ahh, that's why it "didn't work" - I have all sounds turned off!
>
>> - rather like the "toggle keys" for the
>> three lock keys which are part of W'9x anyway, but for some
>> reason hidden away under "Accessibility" or something like
>> that. (I find them useful, as I find it very easy to hit
>> caps lock without meaning to, and this at least tells me
>> I've done so.)

>
>I didn't know about this feature - will have to look it up. That


It's dead simple.

>means installing accessibility options and sticking the 98 CD in
>the drive again... The torture NEVER stops, does it... Actually,


You mean you don't have the WIN98 directory (root contents only) copied
to C:\WINDOWS\OPTIONS\CABS? (That seems to be the location of choice -
though I've never found anyone to explain why.)
[]
>> Far be it from me to encourage illegal activities ... (-:

>
>Well, it WAS given away for free with a magazine and they only
>wanted you to go to the site to get the serial so they could
>send you emails about new versions etc, which I opted out of
>immediately and never heard from them again.
>
>Anyway, seriously, just let me know.


In that case, yes please. (Email me if you wish - anything @ my soft255
domain will reach me; G6JPG@ will usually get read first.)
[]
>> with those rubbery things that stick out of they keyboard -
>> I didn't realise they were actually a sort of mouse for
>> ages, I thought they were just a screen-protecting bump!

>
>That makes sense, actually! They ARE horrible, and they break
>off. And IBM/Lenovo STILL put them on the machines, although I
>believe they have added the little rectangular pad, at least.


You _do_ get very used to using the touchpad; on Saturday I played with
one of the netbooks, which some reviewers had said the very small
touchpad was a bit difficult to use, but I found it no problem. (The
buttons being to the sides rather than below threw me a bit, but I'm
sure one gets used to that too.)

>Anyway, I am reasonably certain I will never ever own a laptop.
>OTOH, small (or big) mouses (mice?) can be plugged into any


Not any: most modern laptops only have USB sockets, or rather don't have
PS/2 ones, so it has to be a USB mouse.

>laptop. And people seem to carry them around in big bags anyway,
>so there's space for lots of junk.


Well, the netbook _is_ particularly dinky, so might buck that trend (on
the basis that you wouldn't go for such a tiny machine if you were going
to put it in a big bag anyway).
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice.
-Abraham Lincoln, 16th U.S. President (1809-1865)
 
T

thanatoid

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:sleSbbWmuF2IFw9O@soft255.demon.co.uk:

<SNIP>

> Yes, but there are/were other ways to stop it jamming that
> _didn't_ involve slowing it down - moving the commonest
> letters so they weren't too close to each other, I guess.


Isn't that exactly what they did designing the insane letter
layout? ;-)

>>I only have a b&w laser, and I almost never print anything.

>
> So, a simple camera (and/or microscope) would be some fun
> for you. Just have a play!


I don't want to get into all my problems, but I have a
pathological aversion to cameras, and a USB microscope would be
too expensive for what fun could be had. I never really learned
how to have fun.

>>I greatly believe in being "paperless". I would LOVE to put
>>all the news snips and misc. stuff I tore out of magazines
>>and newspapers over 30 years on my HD, but the time and
>>effort required will probably ensure that it never happens
>>- not to mention I am not that interested in the stuff
>>anymore. (It

>
> You are me. Again. (And mp3ing my records/CDs/etc., and
> scanning all my old slides/prints ...)


I /did/ finally do the music thing... Only took 5 years...
If I were to scan all my clippings, it would probably take
another 5 years if not more...

>>/would/ make moving a lot easier, but I don't intend to
>>move again, either, let alone with all my crap.)

>
> Ditto. One move after 20 years did show how much junk I
> have - I've made one room here the junk room, but much of
> what's in there hasn't been accessed since I moved in (over
> a year now), so I really ought to throw some of it out ...


Moving is a nightmare. The only thing worse is finding stuff.
Here's a tip from one who has suffered and learned: once you put
something somewhere, LEAVE IT THERE. If you move it, in the
naive interest of "being better organized", unless you make a
catalogue of *everything* you own and where it is - or has been
moved to - you will /always/ look in the original place, not
remembering you moved it. It is HELL. Well, that's how it works
with me, anyway.

>>After installing Acronis, you make an Acronis Rescue Boot
>>CD, which has the program on it, boot from it, and then
>>just put the CD(s) with the last image in afterwards. No
>>problem even if the HD is dead. You put in a new drive and
>>have the same C: that you

>
> Ah, I assumed it'd be something like that. Does it actually
> boot some form of Linux?


It doesn't look like it does. No "* OS loading" line appears at
all, just the A. logo.

> Is it able to handle (recreate) NTFS drives?


I believe so, but from what I have read, ultimately, you are
better off with FAT32 (FWIW).

>Can it read USB HDs/USB CDs?


Later versions, yes, I believe so - not this free one. But I
could be wrong. I am USB- and USB-stick-less.

I'll just post it and you can read the info/pdf and try to do
whatever you want with it.

>>> - rather like the "toggle keys" for the
>>> three lock keys which are part of W'9x anyway


<SNIP>

>>I didn't know about this feature - will have to look it up.

> It's dead simple.


Not as simple as using Metapad which I have had for years and
know and love ;-)

It has some great features besides the i/o ignore feature,
especially when it comes to extra spaces before and after text.
Etc.

>>means installing accessibility options and sticking the 98
>>CD in the drive again... The torture NEVER stops, does
>>it... Actually,

>
> You mean you don't have the WIN98 directory (root contents
> only) copied to C:\WINDOWS\OPTIONS\CABS? (That seems to be
> the location of choice - though I've never found anyone to
> explain why.) []


The location actually makes sense (options since one would be
accessing it to install an /option/ one had not installed before
- or to remove one, or just to enjoy the MS-provided /option/ of
reinstalling parts or all of the OS). I just checked and I do
have that directory, but it has 23 mostly sys files and not a
single CAB. Go Microsoft!

It's not a big deal to put in the CD, anyway.

>>Anyway, seriously, just let me know.

>
> In that case, yes please. (Email me if you wish - anything
> @ my soft255 domain will reach me; G6JPG@ will usually get
> read first.) []


Will write soon to let you know where I'll post it.


--
Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the
votes decide everything.
- Josef Stalin
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B25E35C556C1thanexit@209.197.15.184>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
>news:sleSbbWmuF2IFw9O@soft255.demon.co.uk:
>
><SNIP>
>
>> Yes, but there are/were other ways to stop it jamming that
>> _didn't_ involve slowing it down - moving the commonest
>> letters so they weren't too close to each other, I guess.

>
>Isn't that exactly what they did designing the insane letter
>layout? ;-)


No; you can pick a layout where the commonest letters aren't next to
each other, without it being one that slows things down. (In fact
putting the commonest letters together _would_ slow down a good typist.
[]
>I don't want to get into all my problems, but I have a
>pathological aversion to cameras, and a USB microscope would be
>too expensive for what fun could be had. I never really learned


Mine came to twentysomething pounds, including transport from (I think
it was) Hong Kong. (Mind you, I'd seen the same model for 50 or 60
pounds, also around 100, on UK and US websites.)

>how to have fun.


Aw, shucks (-:
[]
>Moving is a nightmare. The only thing worse is finding stuff.
>Here's a tip from one who has suffered and learned: once you put
>something somewhere, LEAVE IT THERE. If you move it, in the
>naive interest of "being better organized", unless you make a
>catalogue of *everything* you own and where it is - or has been
>moved to - you will /always/ look in the original place, not
>remembering you moved it. It is HELL. Well, that's how it works
>with me, anyway.


Me too.
[Acronis]
>> Ah, I assumed it'd be something like that. Does it actually
>> boot some form of Linux?

>
>It doesn't look like it does. No "* OS loading" line appears at
>all, just the A. logo.


Ah.
>
>> Is it able to handle (recreate) NTFS drives?

>
>I believe so, but from what I have read, ultimately, you are
>better off with FAT32 (FWIW).


I certainly prefer it, for it's easy accessibility (e. g. from a boot
floppy. Though there's something similar around for NT.)
>
>>Can it read USB HDs/USB CDs?

>
>Later versions, yes, I believe so - not this free one. But I
>could be wrong. I am USB- and USB-stick-less.


Right. The machines I'm thinking of getting don't have a CD drive, you
see.
>
>I'll just post it and you can read the info/pdf and try to do
>whatever you want with it.


Thanks.
>
>>>> - rather like the "toggle keys" for the
>>>> three lock keys which are part of W'9x anyway

>
><SNIP>
>
>>>I didn't know about this feature - will have to look it up.

>> It's dead simple.

>
>Not as simple as using Metapad which I have had for years and
>know and love ;-)


The beeps from Toggle Keys don't require you to be running any
particular prog.; IIRR, they come through the internal speaker too, not
the sound card.
[]
>The location actually makes sense (options since one would be
>accessing it to install an /option/ one had not installed before
>- or to remove one, or just to enjoy the MS-provided /option/ of
>reinstalling parts or all of the OS). I just checked and I do
>have that directory, but it has 23 mostly sys files and not a
>single CAB. Go Microsoft!
>
>It's not a big deal to put in the CD, anyway.


No, just quicker if you don't have to, and you can put the CD away
somewhere safe (where you'll never find it, of course). Next time you
_do_ put the CD in, do copy the \win9x directory (you don't need any of
its subdirectories) to W\O\C.
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

....or his cat walked across his keyboard, just as mine has done..<grrrr>
one off cat skin - for sale to good home (Keith Stanbury, 1997-4-16)
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B2E175DB811Cthanexit@209.197.15.184>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
[]
>> I'm thinking of getting one of these "netbooks", which are
>> physically too small to have an optical drive in them; 9 or
>> 10 inch screens, very tiny machines. Like the Eee, only
>> with XP. (Sorry. But at least it's not Vista.)

>
>Aside from the insane OS size and some really stupid unremovable
>"folders", it /might/ be better than /regular/ win98 based on my
>extremely limited experience (about 5 days). Full of MS spyware,
>but not as full of it as Vista.


Well, I doubt I'll be running all the updates, and also there is
something called XPlite from the people who brought us 98lite. And ERUNT
which serves the same purpose as ERU.
[]
>>>The beep is /probably/ a wave file. Anyway,
>>>what good is

>>
>> I doubt it, as (I think) it comes through the internal
>> speaker.

>
>As you yourself say below, that is somewhat irrelevant - I
>believe old machines ran 'everything' through the int. speaker,
>and new machines have better quality internal speakers which can
>handle normal audio (AOT beeps) quite well. Probably better than
>most £10 "external computer speakers", except mono.


No, there is a range of HP/Compaq desktops (maybe other makes too) which
has an internal speaker connected to the sound card; as you say,
acceptable quality. When I said internal speaker, I meant the one that
is driven by a logic output, and really is only capable of beeps (except
with _very_ clever programming).
[]
>I'm not a technician, but I don't believe (aside from things
>like "crappy tinny sound", "boomy muddy sound", or "limited
>frequency response" etc. etc.) ANY speaker (or device used as
>one, you can hook up a transducer to a chair and you /will/ hear
>"sound") is made "for" anything in particular as far as content
>- which of course is not the same as saying most people wouldn't
>rather get a pair of Castle speakers for their HiFi rather than
>a pair of 3" computer speakers.


The little internal speaker connected to the above-mentioned logic line
is usually an acceptable moving-coil loudspeaker unit of the type you'd
find in a cheap radio or whatever; it is the drive electronics that
limit it rather than the unit itself.
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

This area of 'when does a computer know that it doesn't know' is relatively
undeveloped. - Colin Barker (Computing, 1999-2-18 [p. 20])
 
T

thanatoid

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:9BKWSGHFoV6IFwd1@soft255.demon.co.uk:

<SNIP>

> No, there is a range of HP/Compaq desktops (maybe other
> makes too) which has an internal speaker connected to the
> sound card;


I have just exactly one of those (EVO D510) and I based my
rather general and probably incorrect statement on that.

<SNIP>

> The little internal speaker connected to the
> above-mentioned logic line is usually an acceptable
> moving-coil loudspeaker unit of the type you'd find in a
> cheap radio or whatever; it is the drive electronics that
> limit it rather than the unit itself.


As I said, I'm not a technician. I don't even know what "logic
line" means.



--
Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the
votes decide everything.
- Josef Stalin
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

In message <Xns9B2F14D1B619Bthanexit@209.197.15.184>, thanatoid
<waiting@the.exit.invalid> writes
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
>news:9BKWSGHFoV6IFwd1@soft255.demon.co.uk:
>
><SNIP>
>
>> No, there is a range of HP/Compaq desktops (maybe other
>> makes too) which has an internal speaker connected to the
>> sound card;

>
>I have just exactly one of those (EVO D510) and I based my
>rather general and probably incorrect statement on that.
>
><SNIP>
>
>> The little internal speaker connected to the
>> above-mentioned logic line is usually an acceptable
>> moving-coil loudspeaker unit of the type you'd find in a
>> cheap radio or whatever; it is the drive electronics that
>> limit it rather than the unit itself.

>
>As I said, I'm not a technician. I don't even know what "logic
>line" means.
>

[]
In this context, I meant it is driven in a binary fashion - one end of
the speaker is connected to ground (or 5 V), and the electronics either
connects the other end to ditto or doesn't - so current through the
speaker is either on or off, which limits it (except with very clever
programming) to clicks and beeps. The drive to a speaker from the sound
card is more analogue, i. e. current through it is from a variable
voltage source. (These days often one with limited power output also, in
the expectation that the speakers will contain their own amplifier;
early sound cards often had about 2 watts of drive and could thus work
with unpowered speakers.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

This area of 'when does a computer know that it doesn't know' is relatively
undeveloped. - Colin Barker (Computing, 1999-2-18 [p. 20])
 
T

thanatoid

Re: 95/98 ramblings

Re: 95/98 ramblings

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote in
news:S6+tcnRWvb6IFwaO@soft255.demon.co.uk:

<SNIP>

> In this context, I meant it is driven in a binary fashion -
> one end of the speaker is connected to ground (or 5 V), and
> the electronics either connects the other end to ditto or
> doesn't - so current through the speaker is either on or
> off, which limits it (except with very clever programming)
> to clicks and beeps.


Ah. That makes sense.

> The drive to a speaker from the sound
> card is more analogue, i. e. current through it is from a
> variable voltage source. (These days often one with limited
> power output also, in the expectation that the speakers
> will contain their own amplifier; early sound cards often
> had about 2 watts of drive and could thus work with
> unpowered speakers.)


Yes, I noticed that my 11 years old AWE32 sound card has plenty
of power to drive a pair of 50RMS speakers, while the
considerably newer Audigy I put in the EVO has no amplifier chip
at all.


--
Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the
votes decide everything.
- Josef Stalin
 
Top Bottom