In message
,
koonaone writes:
Thanks for the reply DL and John

DL, and J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

*do not even think about* trying to configure WinXP to your old tried
& Tested ways

I fear he's right; they're _very_ different.

OK guys, between you and the machines themselves I've pretty well got
the message. My temptation is to leap in and use these two netbooks as
workhorses, being as they have 300 Gb storage between them, and a

(not 320? 160G seems to be a boilerplate for netbooks!)

flippin GiGabyte of RAM each. Cripey. I think now though with your

(When I tentatively dipped into XP - yes, I'm using a netbook [why have
you got two?] - received wisdom seemed to be that XP was much happier
with 2G than 1, so I bought a 2G module; so far, I haven't really been
frustrated by the lack of performance of the thing as it is, so haven't
got round to fitting it yet. I haven't tried editing big video files,
though.)

good advice I will tread lighter.

When XP was imposed on me at work many years ago, I spent a lot of time
hacking away at it to make it look more like '9x - such as switching to
"classic" start menu; I will admit I've just left that aspect be on this
one, though I _have_ gone for the classic look to Window borders and the
like (I think they take less space, for a start, than the rounded ones).

John, your idea of partitioning off the system files and such didn't
occurr to me, thanks, I'll do that. What I did right off was make a

It isn't my idea as such (-:! In fact the netbook (Samsung) came with
some sort of initial utility that go me to choose how I wanted the drive
partitioned, before I started, so I chose 30 C, rest D (thinking about
it, I think there's a hidden restore partition - maybe that's where your
extra 10G has gone if yours has similar). I could have chosen just to
have C, I think. This was a one-time only thing, not like Partition
Manager or one of its equivalents.

lot of directories "hidden" so at least I didn'r have top look at the
mess they'd made of the C: drive. Then though I was faced with the

I rarely look at C: now - I just leave it to get on with it. I hate to
say so, but it does seem to look after itself reasonably well. I do have
ERUNT, and have installed BartPE which gives me a dual boot so I can
restore the save made by ERUNT if Windows ever won't start (I really
ought to get round to making the CD, but the dual boot menu does seem to
appear early enough in the boot process that I _feel_ it's OK) - and
have made sure it actually does let me do so.

godaufull dogsbreakfast of the program files directory. Could they not
have made one folder for Microsoft products at least? I made my own
programs directory with accessories, bases, browsers, editors,
graphics prog subdir's all neat in a row. I have installed a few of my

Wow, that's organised! (And, I fear, doomed to be frustrated. XP
programmers - not just Microsoft ones - seem to want to do more of this
sort of decision-making for you.) I've limited myself (even on my old
'9x machines; I haven't got round to installing that much on here yet)
to organising the start menu into such categories (text, music, video,
sound, utils, for example). It's nice that in XP you can right-click on
something in the start menu "tree" and select open, rather than have to
explore to it where it used to be under windows\start menu\programs or
whatever. (Though keeping the left pane in Explorer showing the tree has
taken some cuffing, and still doesn't always work, such as when opening
a .zip file.)

favourites, but open office for instance got shanghiad and ended up
installed in the "proper" program files dir. there probably are good
reasons for that, I guess mother knows best.

Or at least makes it hard for you to change it!

First thing I did was install XYPlorerFree ver 5.55.0
[www.xyplorer.com] so I at least have a decent file manager. My first
look at XP's "find::files and folders" arrangement did not activate my
sense of humour, even the cute pup, especially the cute pup.

Yes, it's a bit twee, isn't it. It does _work_, though, and - small
things, but still - lets you enter partial filenames without having to
use asterisks, and other minor but useful frills. (By the way, although
they've renamed it from "Find" to "Search", the shortcut key of Win-F
still brings it up.) (And Win-E for explorer.)

I like the LAN functionality so far, it took no time at all to create

Yes, LAN and USB _do_ work a lot more "out of the box" than under '9x,
especially USB (and card readers).

a 100% clear line to my old machines and download a whack of tried and
true apps and utilities zips. All of them have been handpicked over

It is worth checking whether there's an XP version of your old
favourites though - sometimes they _are_ bloatware, but sometimes
they've managed to remain slim but have added the ability to use some XP
aspects. (As a rough rule, I've often found that old friends whose
latest version will work with XP, but will still work with '9x, tend to
have remained speedy and simple to use.)

the years for speed and reliability and it is a delight to see how K-
Meleon 1.5.3 for instance rockets onto the screen and snaps from page
to page, must be all that RAM and 2 cpu cores or something. My good
old dialup doesn't seem any faster though.

I fear that's limited to the 56k (or whatever) achievable through the
'phone line, and whatever you do it won't go any faster! Sadly, most of
today's web designers seem to just assume everyone's on broadband now -
I would say that, to a first approximation, a large part [probably 50%
)-:] of the 'net is, for practical purposes, now unusable on dialup. Or
rather the web.

I guess what I'll try to do, though I don't know if it's possible, is
do a remote desktop on a XP netbook, from a w98 desktop, with its nice

It's supposed to be, according to the instructions; I haven't tried it.

monitor and keyboard and periferals. Heh heh. I am working my way up

You can put those on the netbook of course - unless it's a PS/2
keyboard/rat (well, you can get adapter "lead"s [which I think include
electronics]). Oh, hang on, do you mean more than just kbd/rat/monitor,
such as a parallel port printer/scanner? (Again, you can get adapter
"cables", but the drivers _may_ not be available for XP - though you'd
be surprised: I've used a "dot matrix" [impact] printer with XP, and it
produced beautiful output, if rather slow and definitely noisy.)

the ladder with that one. At present I can run Komposer 0.8 on the XP,
open and edit and save an html file, from any one of my old 98's. I
don't know what will happen tomorrow when I try to open firefox 3.x
which won't run on win98se (at least it won't allow itself to be
installed, there is a difference) then save a web page so that I can

There's a thing around called something like kernelx which allows a lot
of XP stuff to run - and even more so install - on '98; pop in to one of
the '98 'groups to ask about it.

then edit it with kompozer. Do I want too much from the poor little
things?

Sadly, the "poor little things" have more power and capability than your
old machine(s), in all probability. (Well, not really sadly, I suppose -
progress is in general good.)

I just had a hell of a fright. John's mention, I still use
XTGOLD for the same reason. of XTGold, which I don't know about,

You used DOS, and survived without XTree? (For those that don't know,
it's a - character-mode - utility that gives a file/disc access
interface not that dissimilar to Windows Explorer.) In almost any old
publicity shot from my old department in which a monitor screen was
visible, the familiar blue of the XTree/XTGold screen.

had me off on a google picnic tracking it down. Panic set in when I
realised this forum was gone, buried under googles, xtgolds, and ZTree
for windows pages. Then I realised I had written my reply on a sticky
note. Whew!

XTree Gold 3.0 was the last character-mode version (of Xtree) before
long file names. I still use it - it gives a better view of what's
really there than Explorer (which hides certain aspects, such as the
details of IE's cache, not that I use IE). Ztree is a clone other people
have written that does handle LFNs - I've never got to grips with it,
but it's probably good. As you found, there were "for Windows" versions,
but not (not just IMO) as good as the character mode one. (I use it in a
window, not full screen.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XTree reminds me
that File Manager/Explorer still doesn't have hex/text viewing of any
file, even under Windows 7! And (not that I've used that for ages) the
copy/move of _only some_ files from a directory structure, retaining the
structure.

Well, there's light in the sky, and the chickens will like some feed.
So I'm off.

(-:

yours

douglas

--
J. P. Gilliver. 27 years experience in the electronics industry - seeking
employment (also computer, tester, trainer ...); email for details: CV at
http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/CV2010-3.tif (2-sheet TIFF)!

Computers make it easy for humans to make mistakes that are hard to fix -
Thomas
Landauer (author and psychiatry professor), quoted by Colin Barker (Computing
1999-2-18, p. 21)