--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300001 Date: 02/17/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 12:56pm \/To: ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN THIS (Read 2 times) Subj: Print Processor unknown error. This is one that I've never seen before. Hopefully I'm just overlooking something real simple. In NT 4.0 workstation I get the following Error when I try install a printer and test print it: "Operation could not be completed. Print Processor is unknown". On initial install, NT evidentely did not recognize the printer port. I manually added LPT1. The printer is an HP Laserjet Series II. Presently the system is dual booting between Windows 95 and NT 4.0 workstation. I have re-installed NT 4.0 wks and re-applyed Service pack III. The system prints fine from Windows 95. The printer port tests fine. How do I get NT 4.0 to recognize the printer port? (I think this is the problem). --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Cowboy Country USA! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300002 Date: 02/19/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 10:12am \/To: BOB DAVIDSON (Read 2 times) Subj: Win98 FR> Forgive me for jumping in. BD> wells", did you happen to read my original posting? A BD> prospective client was informed by their outgoing BD> administrator that yes, FAT32 will increase the amount BD> of usable diskspace, but it will also increase the BD> amount of fragmentation. BD> I'm not sure what he was using to base that assumption BD> on, but, the client would like to see (gasp) statistics. BD> Do you know of anyone nerdy, er, I mean efficient BD> enough to have accumulated such info? I don't think it is all that much different from FAT. He could be basing his assumptions on converting from a FAT16 to a FAT32 drive with something like Win98 beta's convert or partition magic. When you go from a 32k or perhaps even 64k cluster size to a 4k cluster size, directorys, files etc become -horribly- fragmented, but just running DEFRAG fixes that problem. On typical small business systems that I've encountered, converting a FAT16 to a FAT32 drive typically picks up 300-450meg on a 1.2 to 1.6gig Hard drive. Just to check, I just ran de-frag on a FAT32 drive I've been using here for about 5 months and and never defragged it. According to Bill, it was 1% fragmented. This is a machine that runs my voice mail (Hot Fax), e-mail and newsgroup reader, OFFICE, etc. I would think the voice mail and e-mail (Hundreds of messages in small files every week) would have a higher than average propensity for fragmentation. By my seat of the pants, it doesn't appear to me that FAT32 fragments on any substantially higher order than FAT16. Never noticed bad fragmentation (as compared to FAT16) on my home computer either and it is a 5 gig FAT32 partition. But I'm not sure what scientific test could be used other than I defrag ever 3 to 5 months and I never felt it was worse (or better) than FAT16. BTW, I much prefer NTFS or HPFS file system. It's faster than FAT32 and also a bit more efficient. Efficiency is relative I guess. --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Cowboy Country USA! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300003 Date: 02/20/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 08:02am \/To: FUAD TUBAIL (Read 2 times) Subj: Uninstalling NT FT> I installed win95 and then winnt, now I want to uninstall winnt in a FT> safe way, that win95 is not affected..? There are no garantees of safety or promises what-so-ever. If you remove NT you remove it at your own risk. First remove the hidden, system and read-only attributes from msdos.sys and copy it to a backup file (MSDOS.SYK or something). Then make yourself a Windows 95 boot disk with the FORMAT A: /S. To that disk copy from c:\windows\command FDISK.EXE and SYS.EXE. Boot off the W95 boot floppy you just made and run FDISK /MBR to rebuild the master boot record. Then from a: do a sys c:. That will get rid of NT's boot loader and W95 dos will boot up. When you do a SYS C: from a floppy, MSDOS.SYS is replaced and it will boot to a command prompt, not windows, which is why you backed up your original MSDOS.SYS file. Use ATTRIB MSDOS.SYS -S -R -H. Then copy MSDOS.SYK to MSDOS.SYS. You will now be booting Winders 95. After copying your backup MSDOS.SYS, you can run ATTRIB MSDOS.SYS +R +S +H if you want to protect your MSDOS.SYS from accidental deletion. You can then DELTREE C:\WINNT. NT leaves a few files in the root directory, PAGEFILE.SYS, NTLDR, BOOT.INI that you can delete. There are probably other NT files in the C:\ directory but I'm not near an NT machine right now so I can't check. But why you would want to do that is beyond me. Most people want to know how to remove W95 and CONVERT to NTFS instead of going backwards. --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Cowboy Country USA! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300004 Date: 02/22/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 10:12am \/To: STEVE QUARRELLA (Read 2 times) Subj: Administrative shares SQ> Is it possible to remove the default administrative SQ> shares (C$, D$, etc) from an NT Workstation (4.0)? I SQ> know that this wasn't possible with NT 3.1, but have SQ> things changed? As it stands now, if I go in and delete SQ> the shares, they return once I bring down the PC and SQ> restart it. I have a user here in the office who has SQ> her reasons for wanting to do this, and would like to SQ> oblige her, if possible. You can't remove the administrative shares. What you can do is only have one local account administrator and keep the password secret. The computer can't be a part of a domain and do this. It has to be setup in only a workgroup and use only local security. If you are in a domain, then anyone who has administrator security will have access to your NT workstation administrative shares. You don't have to be a part of a domain to have access to domain resources. --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Cowboy Country USA! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300005 Date: 02/26/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 11:22am \/To: BOB DAVIDSON (Read 2 times) Subj: Win98 BD> 19 Feb 98 20:01, Tony Dunlap wrote to Bob Davidson: TD> That doesn't worry me as much as the apparent speed loss of FAT32 vs TD> FAT16. I beleive this may be because more "read operations" are BD> One of the things I watched closely when I converted BD> to FAT32/4K was for a difference in speed. If there is BD> a difference, it is so minute as to be unrecognizable. BD> I'm going to leave the hard drive I toss mail on for 30 BD> days before running defrag. This may give me a vague BD> ideas as to what/if there are any differences worth concern. I can't see any discernable difference in mail tossing speed with SQUISH 1.11 DOS tossing mail in Windows 95 on my home system. It still tosses 15-35 msg/sec typically doing around 20-25 with the small echomail bundles (Small bundles-I never toss more than 100-300 messages) I send to the home system. I've not noticed Exel (large spreadsheets), My DOS 9 year data base, games, anything else running any slower or faster than with FAT 16. My son says that it doesn't seem to make any difference in the speed his games run at in DOS only mode either, other than he has found a couple of games out of more than 50 that won't work with FAT32 (No biggy, they were old games that he never used much anyway). It seems to me that there really is very little difference between FAT32 and FAT16 in fragmentation or performance except cluster size that I've ever been able to notice. Seems that that is a consensus from people in this conference that have switched from FAT16 to FAT32 with Windows95 and spent a little time with it. Not scientific, just seat of the pants observations. But both NTFS and HPFS are -far- superior file systems to FAT32 in both performance and storage efficiency. Such is the price one pays for "backwards compatiblity" with obsolete 15-25 year old software technology . --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Cowboy Country USA! (1:303/1) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300006 Date: 02/26/98 From: JERRY SCHWARTZ Time: 07:46pm \/To: JEFF BINKLEY (Read 2 times) Subj: Video Driver [Feb 23, 98 - 22:28] Jeff Binkley of 1:226/600 wrote to All: JB> Has anyone seen a video driver for a Trident TGUI9440AGI chipset PCI ideo JB> card for NT 4.0 ? I've got drivers for NT 3.5 but nothing later. Try poking around the Acer web site. Jerry Schwartz --- Msged/386 4.00 * Origin: Write by Night (1:142/928) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300007 Date: 02/28/98 From: BOB DAVIDSON Time: 12:14am \/To: CHRIS HOLTEN (Read 2 times) Subj: Win98 Hello Chris! 19 Feb 98 10:12, Chris Holten wrote to Bob Davidson: CH> BTW, I much prefer NTFS or HPFS file system. It's faster than FAT32 CH> and also a bit more efficient. Efficiency is relative I guess. Thanks for responding Chris. It would appear that the general acceptance is the same. The added hard drive saving well outweigh the fragmentation issue. If I had my way, they would be converting to NT/NTFS but, I don't hold the purse strings . Bob Davidson ... Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. --- GoldED/386 2.51.A1026+ * Origin: BMC-FDS "bob@adcn.on.ca" (1:163/333) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300008 Date: 02/27/98 From: FRANK RAMSEY Time: 09:16pm \/To: CHRIS HOLTEN (Read 2 times) Subj: Administrative shares Chris Holten wrote in a message to Steve Quarrella: CH> administrative shares. You don't have to be a part of a CH> domain to have access to domain resources. If the domain guest account is disabled (the default), you must be part of the domain to access domain resources. Frank PE, CNE, MCSE, MCP+I, MCP framsey@goodyear.com, frank.ramsey@fallsbbs.com --- * Origin: A Point on Pine Lake, Uniontown, Ohio (1:157/110.70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300009 Date: 02/26/98 From: WAYNE STEELE Time: 05:33pm \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: Wanted! Hi All, I'm after a single program that will allow me to convert AVI, MOV, and whatever other Movie formats to MPG format. I'm running W95 with 32 megs of ram. Anything off the Internet is alright. Lata, Wayne Internet: wsteele@one.net.au & www2.one.net.au/~wsteele --- Ezycom V1.48g0 02fa001d * Origin: Bad News Line 2 Computer Porn Kings (02)9625-5474 (3:713/690) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 206 WINDOWS 32BIT Ref: F3300010 Date: 03/01/98 From: CHRIS HOLTEN Time: 10:18am \/To: FRANK RAMSEY (Read 2 times) Subj: Administrative shares FR> Chris Holten wrote in a message to Steve Quarrella: CH> administrative shares. You don't have to be a part of a CH> domain to have access to domain resources. FR> If the domain guest account is disabled (the default), FR> you must be part of the domain to access domain FR> resources. Hmm..I never noticed that. However I can log on remotely to a different domain than what I am in using an administrator account for that domain and have domain privals. If there is no guest account, then I can't do that? Important safety tip Frank. Thanks. --- Maximus/NT 3.01b1 * Origin: Win 9-Fiving it in COWBOY Country USA! (1:303/1.100)