ok... resident PC guru please.. before i smash this PC..

[Glenn B]

To start some of your problems are coming from system requirements with out a doubt at all, I almost cried when I saw celeron 500 runnign windows XP. That's a mistake in itself as microsoft recommends minimum of 700mhz on a amd athlon/ pentium 3 breed, yes the box says 700mhz , but a 700mhz celeron lacks instructions sets that allow it to keep with with quick changing graphics etc.. and lags behind athlon and pentium breeds in just ever aspect. If your looking to upgrade, my friend has his own store he sells comps for cheap, cheaper if i tell him ur a good "friend" www.focushardware.com If you have comp questions feel free to IM me directly on aol at JeepinMojo, or email me directly. I go to college for this type of stuff so I should be of great help.

a 700 or better would be nice, but it can run fine on slower machines. In fact, I have a couple AMD 450's that it runs fine and stable on. Not as fast as my P4, but still useable.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/upgrading/sysreqs.asp

 

[5-90]

I guess I just gotta ask - Why, pray, is everyone fixated on running XP? Frankly, I've not seen enough yet to be impressed, and certainly not enough to go spend more money on it.

Granted, I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Win32 (I didn't much care for Windows when it was only a shell running overtop of DOS,) but it seems to me that MS finally did something or another right when 2K came out - to me, it is what NT and 98 should have been and weren't.

Granted, the 2K kernel doesn't run everything, but it does everything I need it to do, and does it well and reliably. Finally, a Windows OS that actually works!

Someday, I plan to get used to Linux (when I have more time, and have all my HTML/C/BASIC/PocketC learnin' behind me - say, 2025 or so...) and get away from a lot of MS stuff. Am I the only one to notice that a lot of virii tend to automatically and instantly "incubate" under MSIE/MSOE/MSOutlook? Am I off base here, or not? I am willing to be corrected and/or convinced...

5-90

 

[Glenn B]

I am not interested in trying to convince anybody to run any particular OS, be it Windows, linux, etc.... Most people find what they are comfortable with, and will resist change....
I did hold off on XP for a long time. Win2K was a good OS for me, and worked well, and pretty stable. It took me a long time before I even considered running XP, but once I finally did, there was no turning back. I absolutely love it. Rocksolid OS, compatable with most stuff I have ever ran in to. XP even sorta knows what to do with multi-procs.

For the die hard Win2K user, you can even turn OFF the default Fisher-Price look of XP and it will be very similar to Win2K.

I think it is the best consumer OS they have put out so far. Does not mean it is right for everybody though. It was right for us. Every computer here is either running a licensed copy of XP Pro, linux, or Windows Server 2003 Enterprise.
I think it is the easiest to use for the beginner, and most stable of the major MS releases yet. Does not mean MS is perfect.... and yes, they do have many users that do not secure their systems and propogate worms, virii etc....
Glenn

I guess I just gotta ask - Why, pray, is everyone fixated on running XP? Frankly, I've not seen enough yet to be impressed, and certainly not enough to go spend more money on it.

Granted, I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Win32 (I didn't much care for Windows when it was only a shell running overtop of DOS,) but it seems to me that MS finally did something or another right when 2K came out - to me, it is what NT and 98 should have been and weren't.

Granted, the 2K kernel doesn't run everything, but it does everything I need it to do, and does it well and reliably. Finally, a Windows OS that actually works!

Someday, I plan to get used to Linux (when I have more time, and have all my HTML/C/BASIC/PocketC learnin' behind me - say, 2025 or so...) and get away from a lot of MS stuff. Am I the only one to notice that a lot of virii tend to automatically and instantly "incubate" under MSIE/MSOE/MSOutlook? Am I off base here, or not? I am willing to be corrected and/or convinced...

5-90

 

[RichP]

The OS you run is totally up to the user and what they need it to do. If you are just using it for a web browser mail reading, word processing, spread sheeting and presentation type box then Linux and Open office is by far the best way to go, FREE for the download. If you need apps like quicken or quick books or some other narrow minded software manufactures specific software who only does windows then you are stuck with windows. yea yea yea, I know, lindows and all that ilk.
Generally a linux release will double the life of your hardware performance wise. The mandrake version is fool proof for installing by even the novice user, the only trick is to have all your hardware hooked up when you install so it all goes in the first time
Win98ME MS ought to buy them all back and pay you for 'unusual pain and suffering'.
Win98SE, Next to NT it's The Reboot KING, first new card game I liked, freecelll, and with a 56K dialup I'm pretty good at it, thats about it.
Win2k rock solid
XP Pro [not home, home is a eunich version] pretty rock solid
Server 2003 3 months and not a single crash so far, though I have had problems with external scsi hard disk box hill arrays. It is iffy if it will recognize them w/o a full reboot where as my win2k box picks them right up w/o any power resets, just a quick rescan and they are there.
Linux I just plug them in, power them up, mount /all and the file systems done.
Solaris for X86, the masochists OS, true techie OS for those that thrive on a challenging install, but once it's in and up and running you feel like you just climbed Mt Everest and just remember your hair WILL grow back provided you had any to start with, it's OK.

 

[Kejtar]

Someday, I plan to get used to Linux (when I have more time, and have all my HTML/C/BASIC/PocketC learnin' behind me - say, 2025 or so...)

You're learning BASIC??????? What possed you to do that??

Btw.. install of XP... you install XP on a clean system and then at one point or another it will ask you for either the serial number from what you're upgrading from or it will ask you to insert temporarily the other disk to verify... no need to install the 98 first...

Also during install, start off with NTFS... fat32... just sucks.

 

[sidriptide]

ok ok.. enough of the hijacking now!!! heres where i stand now..... it would NOT take just the XP disk to reformat the HD... got the notorious blue screen again... i didnt write it down but it basically told me there is a damaged sector.. prompted to repair it..... it asked me for an ADMINISTRATOR PASSWORD....what the hell is that all about??? i am the only user on this PC and i do have a password on my user... it would not accept it....3 strikes and your out!!! i put in the Win98 OEM disk and reformatted it fine..... im back to OEM configuration now, well, sort of, i had to find a plug and play driver.. and i still connot locate a driver for my PCI MASS STORAGE DEVICE... i installed a big HD last year and had to partition and all that shit.. and it has a PCI card adapter.... now i cannot find a driver compatible with Win98!!! so i get a startup error that there is no driver for it... and because of that startup error i cannot go forward with the WinXP upgrade..... i dont understand it though... these are the exact steps i took when i installed the HD last year... so i know Win 98 would accept the controller..... heres what i have for a HD in case you can help.... western digital 160 G 7200rpm with an ultra ATA controller...
so lets not bicker over whats best please.... i have XP.. doesnt matter why really..... if im stuck with 98 for now i suppose i'll live but i want to get back where i was... because now i cant install a driver for my cable modem on 98!!! thanks guys
mike

 

[Kejtar]

You're going to bang your head against he wall when you read this, but... most likely your admin password was BLANK.....

Try installing the XP from the CD directly. SInce you're at the reformat stage, take the CD and boot up from that CD and see what happens. It should start the installation process and go from there. If you can't boot of the CD, go to your bios (hit f1, del or f2 or something in the beginning of bootup.. right about when the memory counter goes) and setup so that CD is your first boot device and HD secondary. XP should have no problem seeing that big hard drive...... but.... but... if your hard drive kept being repaired and XP died due to repairs of the HD, your drive might be failing.... it's hard to give a good diagnosis here as fat32 is bad on its own....

Btw, during install when you have the option, go through COMPLETE FORMAT (not fast format, quick format or whatever they call it..)

 

[Kejtar]

oh and make sure to use NTFS this time

 

[Glenn B]

Hey, if ya get tired of all of the opinions that mean nothing about your situation.... and you still have not got it going, you can call me for a phone walk through. Might be easier to get you going that way.

That way you can get past the Win2K VS XP, software VS hardware firewall, Fat vs NTFS, etc..... The main thing is to get the rig running.

PM me if you want to walk through. Would most likely be a couple short phone calls to get through the process, then see how it goes.
Glenn

 

[sidriptide]

i tried it one last time for tonite.. same outcome.... i restart with the XP disk in, then boot from the disk.... it starts it's thing.... then the blue screen tells me there is a problem and process has been shut down.... it says as near as i can tell.. "make sure my windows is updated" "i have hardware without drivers, and either get a driver or disable it in safe mode" i dont have 2 days to sit here using dial-up to do all the needed 98 updates.. and i cant find a driver for the PCI mass storage device, and cant figure out how to disable anything.. especially the HD.. i'll lokk a lil more for a driver but i think i'll continue tommorow...
mike

 

[bgcntry72]

Piddling $.02.

For that particular computer, Win98 is much faster than XP. As for the cable modem drivers, I am absolutely sure that there is a way to get drivers for Win98. Save the XP upgrade for a bigger machine. For what I charge an hour to do this, you would have been able to buy $4000 worth of Alienware for the time you are spending. My laptop is a 1Ghz dell with 512 DDR and a 40G drive, and I went back to 2000 Pro because XP was a dog on it. I am not trying to be harsh, but the computer will be happier without all that overhead.
Good luck.

 

[Kejtar]

Re: Piddling $.02.

For that particular computer, Win98 is much faster than XP.

ummm Bgcountry ... no.....

sidriptide...... Post the specs for that drive and the controller card you're using (make and model). I have a feeling that that is where the problem lies......
1. WIth one of my controller cards in one of hte comps, I had to first install XP onto a drive on the controller that was on the mobo, then after XP was up and running, I shut it down and then installed the PCI controller and booted it up.....
2. The point where you're getting an error.... it really doesn't matter what you have installed on your HD... this error comes at the hardware detection stage from the sounds of it, and it really doesn't matter if you have 98 preinstalled or not.....

 

[bgcntry72]

Kejtar

Please check Winstone tests for a sub 1ghz processor running XP. I don't care if you have 2 gb of RAM, the 500 Celeron processor does not have the instruction sets needed to make XP a viable platform from a performance standpoint.
Results and minimum requirements don't lie.
Again, good luck.
Done here.

 

[Kejtar]

bgcntry..... yes the celeron will not run as fast as the newer processor, but it's not as big of a dog as you're describing... I work in an environment where I have to test my application on different platforms and it wasn't till just recently that the last of the test boxes that was a Celeron 550 with 256 mb of ram got thrown into the parts bin.... But if you want to continue the discussion about performance and different processors, I suggest you start a new thread.

 

[RichP]

The cable modem does not even enter into it yet.
As for compatibility, thats a different issue. There are main line boards out there that were sold during win98 timeframe that just will not run win2k or XP, some will run XP but not win2k. Some MSI and tekram boards have that problem but they are upfront about it on their sites and tell you whether it is win2k or XP compatible.
I know you formated the drive but I would suggest FDISK'ing it first then let XP's installer do the drive work.
Now it is possible that your hard drive could be bad or going bad, head over to the drive manufacturers web site if you can and pull down a copy of their diagnostics, you may have to hunt some or call their tech support for the path but they are there. The drive diags are pretty intensive and will generate codes that the manufactures tech support uses for returns under warranty.
That XP should drop right in or at least get further than it has, incompatiblities generly show AFTER it has copied the files to the HD and rebooted to do the install. But if it ran it before for a long period of time then started puking incompatiblities are not the problem.
When and if you grab the diags create boot floppy on another machine, copy the diags and write protect it before you boot with it. I would defenitely fdisk it though.
If you have any microsoft friends see if you can borrow a copy of the oem preinstallation cd, has some good info on how to install. or the 'ABC's of OPK' cd again from MS.
Another thing to look at is the bios, head over to your manufacturers site and see if they have an upgrade, may solve the problem of that big &ssed drive.

 

[Kejtar]

I know you formated the drive but I would suggest FDISK'ing it first then let XP's installer do the drive work.

Rich you missed the fact that hes using an aftermarket HD controller.... with the HD sized at 160gb... he has to (especially on the older mobo)... and I think that's where the problem lies

 

[RichP]

Then all he should have to do is interupt the install when it asks for addional drivers and load them. The controller should have come with drivers even if it was a white box. Whether there are XP drivers there thats another story, sometimes the win2k drivers will work sometimes not.
That might even be a better incentive to check for a bios update so he can eliminate the card and plug it directly to a MB controller, though at first glance at the processor he mentioned he may have problems getting an updated bios that goes above 80gb. I know my Slot 1 550 asus MB tops out at 80 with the last one they put out for my board which is why I have an external scsi array on it.

What model MB
What version bios
What make/model controller [please don't say promise ]

I know for a fact that XP sp1 has the drivers for the adaptec eide raid controller native so that might be an option but I'd shoot for the bios update first and see what happens. Other option is to go pick up a smaller drive for the OS and use that 'go watch two movies while it formats' monster drive for data and storage.

 

[sidriptide]

ok guys. here where i stand now.... i loaded a generic driver from 98 the seems to get me past the start-up error....... so it seems a ihave Win98 up and running properly.... now i have a new stumbling block... i start the XP upgrade and it tells me i have not got a current windows program installed so i cant upgrade!!!!!!!1 WHAT THE F' IS THIS SHIT!!!!!!!! it prompts for my 98 disk, so i insert my OEM disc and it tells me i did not insert a disk..... do i need to reregister my OEM O/S again?? do i need to run all the available updates before i upgrade?? i am learning alot about my patience level this week..... thanks for all the help.... i am about to tear into it and return to the OEM set-up and clear up the issues and then jump thru the hoops of reinstalling it all over again.........
i need a beer.........
mike

 

[Kejtar]

I start the XP upgrade and it tells me i have not got a current windows program installed so i cant upgrade!!!!!!!1 WHAT THE F' IS THIS SHIT!!!!!!!! it prompts for my 98 disk, so i insert my OEM disc and it tells me i did not insert a disk.....

THat sounds really odd.... are you using the right disk? How did you do it the previous time? No updates should be required to start the process ....

 

[sidriptide]

i'd rather be wrenching in the driveway in the snow...............
it just ain't happening guys........ and i don't know why.... i have 98 up and running..... i still cannot run XP on top of it now... same errors.. tried loading the XP files to the HD and doing it that way..... no go........ it's like it gets to a point in the install and it doesnt recognize itself anymore... wont find a disk in the drive with drivers on it.... even when it propmts for them... we fixed a few corrupted files... still doesnt help.... i'm thinkin i had a damaged HD BEFORE my recent installs..... and the additional sofware and demamds on the system maybe brought it to light.... i an giving up on it for now and setting up 98 at least so i can get on with my life.... i upgraded it last year to buy some time rather than get a new PC..... and to throw more $$ at this one is not really a good idea since the prices of new are so low.... big rebates this time of year with Xmas coming.... i really "need" XP for what i've been doing lately so rather than spend a couple hundred$$ on big bandaids.. i'll spend a bit more and just go new..... yes i've been beat!!!! 3 of us cant get it figured out..... gonna live with this for now.... what do you guys think?? think th eHD is damaged??
mike