Re: Update on slow boot problem

"q" <q@SPAMSTOP.cocker-weber.com> wrote in message
news:bv_Ja.3375$QN3.2548@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
> Like many others, I uninstalled, reinstalled XP, set a new backup point,
> everything worked great. Reinstalled NSW. Same results. 387 seconds to
> boot. Uninstalled NSW, returned to backup point and everything is fine.
> Downloaded AVG antivirus. Works fine.
>
> Unfortunately Symantec has done nothing to fix their product. I will not
> reinstall it again. I will not purchase updates or upgrades. I am done
> with a product I once liked a lot and used a lot. I thought it added
> stability to XP. (flush). Bye, Symantec.
>
>

Your problem is more likely because of your using windows Xplode. I have 3
(real licensed)copies here I have just laying around because of people
trading me them for win98SE. I ended up with a bunch of licensed win98SE's
from a local computer mom and pop store that went belie up and their stock
was auctioned off. Everyone was bidding on the WinXP and no one wanted the
100+ boxes of WindowsSE, and I bid a dollar and won and they said I could
have one or as many as I wanted at the same price, so I took them all<s>
whether or not it was a good deal became apparent after I sold several of
them for $25 each not a bad return. Now when someone that buys a new system
and is disappointed with XP I sell them a in the box copy for $25 and most
of them give me the "not for re-sale" holographic XP cd's that came with
their pc. Then if I like I can legally build a pc and put XP on it if the
customer wants it that is, and if they don't I can put SE. I am currently
playing around with the latest build of Longhorn that my son-in-law sent me
from Germany and I guess what he has been telling me about the Germans
getting the new builds of windows products before the US is true.
Personally I don't like XP for several reasons the main one being that
probably less the 5% of the holes have been found and or plugged so far and
almost all the holes for SE have been found. I have a few clients that are
still happy with win95; because of the virus writers and malware creators
have left off writing exploits just for it and some of the newer exploits
*won't* work on an old win95 instillation especially if they don't have
active desktop installed. I even have 1 client that still uses win 3.11 I
just about have them convinced however to switch and then just use the sort
of win 3.11 interface that comes with every windows OS.

--
/}
@###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
\}
Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam

I, on the other hand love XP. I have been using several of the same
business programs since 3.11. I used to spend 1 or 2 days every month
making 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE work. W2000 was the first really stable OS. I
would have gone NT but my business apps would bnot run in NT. I have had a
total of *** ZERO *** problems with XP. After removing NSW, I have ***
ZERO *** problems with XP.

With XP I can run a graphics program, business database, email, stream music
and use my desktop as a small group server. No problems. That is what I
ask of an OS.

I still run an old DOS app once in a while for old data. XP runs it with
*** ZERO *** trouble. More than I can say about 98SE. But, your results
may vary, depending on milage, usage, addons, etc.etc.etc.




"Sugien" <dinosoftNOSPAM@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:tc0Ka.5179$Hw.4404111@news2.news.adelphia.net...
>
> "q" <q@SPAMSTOP.cocker-weber.com> wrote in message
> news:bv_Ja.3375$QN3.2548@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
> > Like many others, I uninstalled, reinstalled XP, set a new backup point,
> > everything worked great. Reinstalled NSW. Same results. 387 seconds
to
> > boot. Uninstalled NSW, returned to backup point and everything is fine.
> > Downloaded AVG antivirus. Works fine.
> >
> > Unfortunately Symantec has done nothing to fix their product. I will
not
> > reinstall it again. I will not purchase updates or upgrades. I am done
> > with a product I once liked a lot and used a lot. I thought it added
> > stability to XP. (flush). Bye, Symantec.
> >
> >
>
> Your problem is more likely because of your using windows Xplode. I have
3
> (real licensed)copies here I have just laying around because of people
> trading me them for win98SE. I ended up with a bunch of licensed
win98SE's
> from a local computer mom and pop store that went belie up and their stock
> was auctioned off. Everyone was bidding on the WinXP and no one wanted
the
> 100+ boxes of WindowsSE, and I bid a dollar and won and they said I could
> have one or as many as I wanted at the same price, so I took them all<s>
> whether or not it was a good deal became apparent after I sold several of
> them for $25 each not a bad return. Now when someone that buys a new
system
> and is disappointed with XP I sell them a in the box copy for $25 and most
> of them give me the "not for re-sale" holographic XP cd's that came with
> their pc. Then if I like I can legally build a pc and put XP on it if the
> customer wants it that is, and if they don't I can put SE. I am currently
> playing around with the latest build of Longhorn that my son-in-law sent
me
> from Germany and I guess what he has been telling me about the Germans
> getting the new builds of windows products before the US is true.
> Personally I don't like XP for several reasons the main one being
that
> probably less the 5% of the holes have been found and or plugged so far
and
> almost all the holes for SE have been found. I have a few clients that
are
> still happy with win95; because of the virus writers and malware creators
> have left off writing exploits just for it and some of the newer exploits
> *won't* work on an old win95 instillation especially if they don't have
> active desktop installed. I even have 1 client that still uses win 3.11 I
> just about have them convinced however to switch and then just use the
sort
> of win 3.11 interface that comes with every windows OS.
>
> --
> /}
> @###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
> \}
> Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam
>
>

"q" <q@SPAMSTOP.cocker-weber.com> wrote in message
news:OU0Ka.13309$Kg7.10693@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> I, on the other hand love XP. I have been using several of the same
> business programs since 3.11. I used to spend 1 or 2 days every month
> making 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE work. W2000 was the first really stable OS. I
> would have gone NT but my business apps would bnot run in NT. I have had
a
> total of *** ZERO *** problems with XP. After removing NSW, I have ***
> ZERO *** problems with XP.
>
> With XP I can run a graphics program, business database, email, stream
music
> and use my desktop as a small group server. No problems. That is what I
> ask of an OS.
>
> I still run an old DOS app once in a while for old data. XP runs it with
> *** ZERO *** trouble. More than I can say about 98SE. But, your
results
> may vary, depending on milage, usage, addons, etc.etc.etc.
>

And of course a SHILL's results *never* very from the company's line, or if
not a shill then some one that has fallen for the M$ BS hook line and
sinker.

>
>
<snip>

XP, is the biggest piece of bloat ware M$ has pawned off on the public to
date. Longhorn (M$'s next big latest must have OS) on the other hand does
seam to deliver on all the *promises* they made for XP. Several of the home
networks I monitor for problems had quite a few more with XP then they ever
did with SE. Even after I installed NetBEUI from the XP cd. M$ also needs
to be realistic with the minimum requirements for XP; because in reality
anything less then a 1Ghz machine running a minimum of 256Mb of ram runs
slower then the same machine using SE. imnsho and those whom I help with
there pc needs anyone that is wanting to upgrade to another OS from SE,
should wait until Longhorn makes it's public debut; but then what you want
to bet that Redmond will hold it off the shelves until the existing
stockpiles of XP are sold. I lost what little bit of respect I had for M$
when they released XP knowing of a critical bug and instead of repressing
the CD's and absorbing the hit on their pocket book they instead rushed it
to market and then waited for a few other critical bugs to show up before
including all of the know ones in SP1. Had more of the shall we say shadier
side of the computing world been privy to what a few selected security
people knew (and were in bed with M$; because of their knowing about the
holes but not reporting or making them public as they should have; because
in their hope of getting an inside track with M$ and holding back reporting
they in effect had those that installed XP hung out to dry if the shady side
found out what the few select security people knew) then M$ and they would
have collectively had quite a lot of egg on their faces and some serious
explaining to do had all those XP systems been compromised with a bug and
hole that M$ and some others knew about *BEFORE* it even shipped but they
shipped anyway. But of course that is a mater of public record if you don't
believe me or have never heard about it then look it up.

Here is what you should have waited for:

http://users.adelphia.net/~dinosoft/longhorn/

well sort of; because that is one of the earliest versions I got, and put
some screen captures up to show a friend because he wanted to know what was
the next incarnation of Windows was going to be; but in some of the later
builds of Longhorn they have corrected quite a few of the earlier bugs; but
even the very *first* build of Longhorn was vastly superior to XP


--
/}
@###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
\}
Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:38:38 GMT, "q" <q@SPAMSTOP.cocker-weber.com>
wrote:

>I, on the other hand love XP. I have been using several of the same
>business programs since 3.11. I used to spend 1 or 2 days every month
>making 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE work. W2000 was the first really stable OS. I
>would have gone NT but my business apps would bnot run in NT. I have had a
>total of *** ZERO *** problems with XP. After removing NSW, I have ***
>ZERO *** problems with XP.
>
>With XP I can run a graphics program, business database, email, stream music
>and use my desktop as a small group server. No problems. That is what I
>ask of an OS.
>
>I still run an old DOS app once in a while for old data. XP runs it with
>*** ZERO *** trouble. More than I can say about 98SE. But, your results
>may vary, depending on milage, usage, addons, etc.etc.etc.

That's fantastic, say hi to Melinda for me <g>

Bart

If I were you I would stop using Windows and switch to Linux... Although if
you can configure Linux well, you probably better keep using Windows XP...
Because with a little bit registry editing and configuring, you can make
the system incredibly stable. Something nobody is able to say about any
Win9x system. These systems crash at average of 3 times a day. There goes
your productivity. I agree even XP has its problems, but they are easier to
solve then the problems in 9x, where you can't find a good report of the
error. Further the networkcapabilities in 9x are so lousy, that it becomes
more interesting to start sending snailmail again. And about the security of
9x, well start to read the white papers... 9x only works on FAT, which is
not safe. When it comes to virii, there are still enough of them that work
with the old systems. So don't worry, you will have your attack soon... But
fortunately for us, you will have to switch to a modern version soon,
because Microsoft has already stopped on develloping the old systems. To
finish this message, I don't think that you will go ride a bike on the
highway just because a car might run out of gas...


"Sugien" <dinosoftNOSPAM@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:MZ2Ka.5294$Hw.4428124@news2.news.adelphia.net...
>
> "q" <q@SPAMSTOP.cocker-weber.com> wrote in message
> news:OU0Ka.13309$Kg7.10693@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> > I, on the other hand love XP. I have been using several of the same
> > business programs since 3.11. I used to spend 1 or 2 days every month
> > making 3.11, 95, 98, 98SE work. W2000 was the first really stable OS. I
> > would have gone NT but my business apps would bnot run in NT. I have
had
> a
> > total of *** ZERO *** problems with XP. After removing NSW, I have
***
> > ZERO *** problems with XP.
> >
> > With XP I can run a graphics program, business database, email, stream
> music
> > and use my desktop as a small group server. No problems. That is what
I
> > ask of an OS.
> >
> > I still run an old DOS app once in a while for old data. XP runs it
with
> > *** ZERO *** trouble. More than I can say about 98SE. But, your
> results
> > may vary, depending on milage, usage, addons, etc.etc.etc.
> >
>
> And of course a SHILL's results *never* very from the company's line, or
if
> not a shill then some one that has fallen for the M$ BS hook line and
> sinker.
>
> >
> >
> <snip>
>
> XP, is the biggest piece of bloat ware M$ has pawned off on the public to
> date. Longhorn (M$'s next big latest must have OS) on the other hand does
> seam to deliver on all the *promises* they made for XP. Several of the
home
> networks I monitor for problems had quite a few more with XP then they
ever
> did with SE. Even after I installed NetBEUI from the XP cd. M$ also
needs
> to be realistic with the minimum requirements for XP; because in reality
> anything less then a 1Ghz machine running a minimum of 256Mb of ram runs
> slower then the same machine using SE. imnsho and those whom I help with
> there pc needs anyone that is wanting to upgrade to another OS from SE,
> should wait until Longhorn makes it's public debut; but then what you want
> to bet that Redmond will hold it off the shelves until the existing
> stockpiles of XP are sold. I lost what little bit of respect I had for M$
> when they released XP knowing of a critical bug and instead of repressing
> the CD's and absorbing the hit on their pocket book they instead rushed it
> to market and then waited for a few other critical bugs to show up before
> including all of the know ones in SP1. Had more of the shall we say
shadier
> side of the computing world been privy to what a few selected security
> people knew (and were in bed with M$; because of their knowing about the
> holes but not reporting or making them public as they should have; because
> in their hope of getting an inside track with M$ and holding back
reporting
> they in effect had those that installed XP hung out to dry if the shady
side
> found out what the few select security people knew) then M$ and they would
> have collectively had quite a lot of egg on their faces and some serious
> explaining to do had all those XP systems been compromised with a bug and
> hole that M$ and some others knew about *BEFORE* it even shipped but they
> shipped anyway. But of course that is a mater of public record if you
don't
> believe me or have never heard about it then look it up.
>
> Here is what you should have waited for:
>
> http://users.adelphia.net/~dinosoft/longhorn/
>
> well sort of; because that is one of the earliest versions I got, and put
> some screen captures up to show a friend because he wanted to know what
was
> the next incarnation of Windows was going to be; but in some of the later
> builds of Longhorn they have corrected quite a few of the earlier bugs;
but
> even the very *first* build of Longhorn was vastly superior to XP
>
>
> --
> /}
> @###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
> \}
> Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam
>
>

"Arjan Hulshoff" <arjan.m.hulshoff@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:1h8Ka.66187$1u5.5386@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
> If I were you I would stop using Windows and switch to Linux... Although
if
> you can configure Linux well, you probably better keep using Windows XP...
> Because with a little bit registry editing and configuring, you can make
> the system incredibly stable. Something nobody is able to say about any
> Win9x system. These systems crash at average of 3 times a day. There goes
> your productivity. I agree even XP has its problems, but they are easier
to
> solve then the problems in 9x, where you can't find a good report of the
> error. Further the networkcapabilities in 9x are so lousy, that it becomes
> more interesting to start sending snailmail again. And about the security
of
> 9x, well start to read the white papers... 9x only works on FAT, which is
> not safe. When it comes to virii, there are still enough of them that work
> with the old systems. So don't worry, you will have your attack soon...
But
> fortunately for us, you will have to switch to a modern version soon,
> because Microsoft has already stopped on develloping the old systems. To
> finish this message, I don't think that you will go ride a bike on the
> highway just because a car might run out of gas...
>
>


I have had several pc's networked in my home every since win 3.11 days
and have found every version of window perfectly stable if configured
correctly; but then again I have been either working around or with
computers most of my life. Back when I was in school I could only read
about them because only large corporations or the military had them; but
later on I got a more hands on approach. Just because M$ quits supporting
something does not mean that people will have to quite using them; but maybe
that will become true for virus writers and malwar makers; because some of
the emailing virus won't work on win95 or earlier and when those that write
such things start writing things with XP and later version in their sites
maybe those that *don't* upgrade will be MORE secure then those that do;
because with the new OS's come new vulnerabilities that the older OS doesn't
have. My router and software firewall as well as some software I have
created have so far (knock on wood) protected me quite well and the only
times I have ever had a penetration was when I was running a honey pot; but
then again that was what I wanted, was for those that liked and looked for
systems to attack, so that I could sit and see how they were getting in and
what they were doing and using and then I was better able to protect my
*real* systems. Some that have thought they have penetrated something and
downloaded something called "mypasswords.exe" or other SE type of file surly
got a nasty surprise, lol. When the public finally wakes up and realizes
that they are paying through the nose every few years for the next *new*
better OS bloatware and decide to keep what they have then maybe Redmond
will get a wake up call. I am waiting for the day when GNU truly catches on
and software goes back to it's roots and becomes once again FREE like it was
back when everyone was mad ad Bill Gates for having the audacity to try and
make someone pay for software in the first place. I thing all software
should be free and software should be more like a library and the for the
private individual or children ALL software should be free; but for business
or anyone using it to make a profit then they should have to pay to support
the industry; but the individual and children should NOT have to pay for
software. After all who knows the next great earth saving invention or what
ever may be created or even worse yet NOT created for the lack of software.


--
/}
@###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
\}
Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam

If we are talking about how much experience we have then I am glad to say
that I can match your experience. Maybe I have even been more lucky then
you, because my grandfather had one of the first computers for business use
in Europe. I have worked with DOS and practically every Windows version that
was released. I can even remember the days that I had a Commodore 64 and I
recorded computerprograms from the radio for my C64. To me you start to
sound like someone with not so much vision. And that's too bad because you
had it according to your story. Everything in this world evolves and so do
operating systems like Windows. Microsoft has to develop new systems,
because people get different demands and are starting to use a computer in a
different way. Although I agree with you that there are more security issues
on new systems, but Microsoft takes a big effort to solve this. But this
doesn't mean that Win9x is without security problems anymore. Basically
Win9x isn't developed to be very secure. Win9x is actually a system for home
use, to lower the costs of expensive hardware and software.Further more
Microsoft has to bring new products on the market frequently to keep their
share of the market. About the point that you make about the fact that
software should be free, I would love that too. But you know the developers
of these programs also have families who need to eat... And if you don't
agree with that, then Linux is a good alternative, although if you want
professional programs today, then you need to buy licenses too. My mum
always said to me: "Only the sunrise is for free!" And you know what? She is
right! Besides who can say honestly that he has no pirated software on his
computer? Basically that is the big success of Microsoft. Everyone copies
the new OS of MS and installs it... Actually MS is quiet cooperative with
this. Windows XP Home for instance can be installed after 4 months on a new
computer and activated without losing the system that is already installed
with this copy of Windows. I don't think that MS earns a lot of money on
homeusers, I think that their biggest income is from licenses that companies
buy. And companies will keep doing that as long as homeusers keep using
Windows.
To get back to reliability... I wouldn't use a Win9x system to use as a
server. First of it actually doesn't have the capabilities and second it is
lousy to secure. I admit that Win NT 4.0 Server wasn't that great, but
Windows 2000 Server was a great improvement! At the moment I am running
Windows Server 2003 in several testnetworks and I must say that I am very
positive about the OS, although I will still advise not to switch to this
server yet. But that is because I think a system needs to be tested
extensively. As workstations I rather prefer the NT versions too, because of
the better compatebility with the server and the ease to cofigure it. Win9x
is just not made for networking! And why is Win9x not stable, well because
the memory management is so sophisticated that it cna clean up memoryleaks.
So you easily run out of memory. Installation and deinstallation of programs
aren't managed well either in Win9x. This causes a more unstable computer.
Ok, that problem isn't completely solved in the new systems either, but in
the new systems there is better taken care of. Microsoft can never guarantee
that Windows will be 100% stable unless you only install Microsoft products.
Now if I look at the hardware and drivers under Win9x (and also WinNT 4.0),
then there has been made a huge progress in the new systems to install new
devices. I can remember that I had many problems to get a modem installed in
Win95 and NT 4.0. Win98 and Me were an improvemnt, but not like Windows 2000
and XP. Maybe it sounds strange, but I can understand your point of view...
You are probably very used to Windows 98SE and maybe less in the NT systems.
At least that would make many things clear to me.
If you might be interested, I have been testing Windows Longhorn too. But
the real revolution will be Windows Blackcomb, if I may believe Microsoft
that is. But I certainly wouldn't use Longhorn now. There are too many
security flaws in it, but then again it is a Beta or like they always say on
websites: under construction! However I might never use the final version of
Longhorn, because of that Paladium thingy, that's why I seriously think to
switch completely to Linux. Anyway we will see what happens. At the moment I
prefer Windows 2000 or XP, also because I like it better to develop
programs.

"Sugien" <dinosoftNOSPAM@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:qy8Ka.5507$Hw.4499833@news2.news.adelphia.net...
>
.. I thing all software
> should be free and software should be more like a library and the for the
> private individual or children ALL software should be free; but for
business
> or anyone using it to make a profit then they should have to pay to
support
> the industry; but the individual and children should NOT have to pay for
> software. After all who knows the next great earth saving invention or
what
> ever may be created or even worse yet NOT created for the lack of
software.
>
>
So you're equating the need for access to software with what, access to
healthcare? I suppose you think toll roads should be free to every one
except cab drivers and truck drivers? And liquor should be free to everyone
except restaurants and bars? Do you ever explore your position before you
stake it?

"Arjan Hulshoff" <arjan.m.hulshoff@zonnet.nl> wrote in message
news:MceKa.66437$1u5.5275@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
> If we are talking about how much experience we have then I am glad to say
> that I can match your experience. Maybe I have even been more lucky then
> you, because my grandfather had one of the first computers for business
use
> in Europe. I have worked with DOS and practically every Windows version
that
> was released. I can even remember the days that I had a Commodore 64 and I
> recorded computerprograms from the radio for my C64. To me you start to
> sound like someone with not so much vision. And that's too bad because you
> had it according to your story. Everything in this world evolves and so do
> operating systems like Windows. Microsoft has to develop new systems,
> because people get different demands and are starting to use a computer in
a
> different way. Although I agree with you that there are more security
issues
> on new systems, but Microsoft takes a big effort to solve this. But this
> doesn't mean that Win9x is without security problems anymore. Basically
> Win9x isn't developed to be very secure. Win9x is actually a system for
home
> use, to lower the costs of expensive hardware and software.Further more
> Microsoft has to bring new products on the market frequently to keep their
> share of the market. About the point that you make about the fact that
> software should be free, I would love that too. But you know the
developers
> of these programs also have families who need to eat... And if you don't
> agree with that, then Linux is a good alternative, although if you want
> professional programs today, then you need to buy licenses too. My mum
> always said to me: "Only the sunrise is for free!" And you know what? She
is
> right! Besides who can say honestly that he has no pirated software on his
> computer? Basically that is the big success of Microsoft. Everyone copies
> the new OS of MS and installs it... Actually MS is quiet cooperative with
> this. Windows XP Home for instance can be installed after 4 months on a
new
> computer and activated without losing the system that is already installed
> with this copy of Windows. I don't think that MS earns a lot of money on
> homeusers, I think that their biggest income is from licenses that
companies
> buy. And companies will keep doing that as long as homeusers keep using
> Windows.
> To get back to reliability... I wouldn't use a Win9x system to use as a
> server. First of it actually doesn't have the capabilities and second it
is
> lousy to secure. I admit that Win NT 4.0 Server wasn't that great, but
> Windows 2000 Server was a great improvement! At the moment I am running
> Windows Server 2003 in several testnetworks and I must say that I am very
> positive about the OS, although I will still advise not to switch to this
> server yet. But that is because I think a system needs to be tested
> extensively. As workstations I rather prefer the NT versions too, because
of
> the better compatebility with the server and the ease to cofigure it.
Win9x
> is just not made for networking! And why is Win9x not stable, well because
> the memory management is so sophisticated that it cna clean up
memoryleaks.
> So you easily run out of memory. Installation and deinstallation of
programs
> aren't managed well either in Win9x. This causes a more unstable computer.
> Ok, that problem isn't completely solved in the new systems either, but in
> the new systems there is better taken care of. Microsoft can never
guarantee
> that Windows will be 100% stable unless you only install Microsoft
products.
> Now if I look at the hardware and drivers under Win9x (and also WinNT
4.0),
> then there has been made a huge progress in the new systems to install new
> devices. I can remember that I had many problems to get a modem installed
in
> Win95 and NT 4.0. Win98 and Me were an improvemnt, but not like Windows
2000
> and XP. Maybe it sounds strange, but I can understand your point of
view...
> You are probably very used to Windows 98SE and maybe less in the NT
systems.
> At least that would make many things clear to me.
> If you might be interested, I have been testing Windows Longhorn too. But
> the real revolution will be Windows Blackcomb, if I may believe Microsoft
> that is. But I certainly wouldn't use Longhorn now. There are too many
> security flaws in it, but then again it is a Beta or like they always say
on
> websites: under construction! However I might never use the final version
of
> Longhorn, because of that Paladium thingy, that's why I seriously think to
> switch completely to Linux. Anyway we will see what happens. At the moment
I
> prefer Windows 2000 or XP, also because I like it better to develop
> programs.
>
>

Windows Blackcomb (yes there is a very early beta if you know where and
*whom* to ask) is not all that great at least not what I have seen and used
of it; but I myself am considering biting the bullet and going to *.nix;
because even with WINE it is a close approximation to windows. As for C=
64, way back I wrote a program that poked into the 2K buffer of the 1541 and
would stay there when the 64 was turned off and back on then when the 64
accessed the 1541 the first time after being recycled it would reload into
memory. Yes I used to always have to have the latest and always had (and
still do have for that mater) the newest builds of the newest OS from M$ to
play around with on my test machine. One of the first things I do is to go
in and see what was left in from the previous system and what was taken out,
then I sit until I can crash it at least once and only one time did I loose
any sleep before I found at least one way to crash it<s> I , and most likely
John and Jane Q. Public are getting tired of having to learn a new OS ever
few years, maybe it is because I am getting older; but then the largest user
base is also (the baby boomers) and want what feels comfortable and
familiar. Maybe M$ would be better off putting more under the hood and
still have the system GUI accessed if not the exact then almost the exact
same way as the previous one. My biggest gripe and *all* those I have
talked to about XP, is it's backwards compatibility; because some users are
starting to think M$ is in bed with the hardware makers to make the users
have to re-tool all their expensive add-ons like capture cards, and such
quite a lot of older very expensive to replace hardware just WONT WORK with
XP even with updated drivers, well if you can even find updated drivers
which is very unlikely.


--
/}
@###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
\}
Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam

And that is exactly the reason why Microsoft will always make it possible to
copy its software, so homeusers will be able to use it. Have you ever
figured out why so many people use pirated software? I think that if
Microsoft really wants to catch all these people that 9 out of 10
households will have to go to court, because they use illegal software of
Microsoft. What US-politicians disagree about a successful Dutch
drugspolicy, is what Microsoft does because they know that they earn money
with it. And then I am talking about allowing soft drugs and allowing
software piracy for use at home...


"Sugien" <dinosoftNOSPAM@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:tLkKa.5927$Hw.4612134@news2.news.adelphia.net...
>
> "optikl" <optikl@aol.com> wrote in message
> news6gKa.14213$Bg.9256@rwcrnsc54...
> >
> > "Sugien" <dinosoftNOSPAM@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> > news:qy8Ka.5507$Hw.4499833@news2.news.adelphia.net...
> > >
> > . I thing all software
> > > should be free and software should be more like a library and the for
> the
> > > private individual or children ALL software should be free; but for
> > business
> > > or anyone using it to make a profit then they should have to pay to
> > support
> > > the industry; but the individual and children should NOT have to pay
for
> > > software. After all who knows the next great earth saving invention
or
> > what
> > > ever may be created or even worse yet NOT created for the lack of
> > software.
> > >
> > >
> > So you're equating the need for access to software with what, access to
> > healthcare? I suppose you think toll roads should be free to every one
> > except cab drivers and truck drivers? And liquor should be free to
> everyone
> > except restaurants and bars? Do you ever explore your position before
you
> > stake it?
> >
> >
>
> At least I have my *own* opinion, and not my companies like most here do.
> fyi, truck drivers *do* pay more road taxes here in the USA then what the
> public do; but then they tear the roads up more; because of there having
> heaver loads. Software can not be compared to liquor because software is
> actually nothing more then an Idea that is written down, which anyone with
a
> compiler can type in and use, there for it can not be equated to liquor
> which is a physical thing. If only businesses and those that would use it
> to make a profit were to pay for it then I think that anti pir8cy laws
could
> be given a lot more teeth. Software makers should look at it, that if
they
> give the private individuals their product then those people will
recommend
> it to there work places and also if someone already knows how to use a
> software title because they were given it for free at home and spent there
> time at home learning to be proficient using it, then business would save
> money from not having to train them. At the very least all *SCHOOLS*
should
> be given free software; because as M$ has been finding out, if you give
> software away to schools and kids grow up using it when those children go
> into business they will by what they are use to using to use in their
> business.
>
>
> --
> /}
> @###{ ]::::::::::ino-Soft Software::::::::::::>
> \}
> Live WebCam http://www.dino-soft.org/cam
>
>