If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
How do I insrtall XP from scratch?
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:59:28 -0500, Paul wrote:
wrote: From what you're saying, am I correct to assume that those external drives that plug into a USB, are SATA drives? I have 3 of them, a 250, 320, and 500GB. I have never opened one of them. I've seen them in the stores as high as 1TB lately. It depends on the vintage. They're most likely SATA, but if they're older, they could also be IDE. One which is 1TB, that would be SATA for sure. The oldest one is about 5 years old. It's the smallest data (250gb) and biggest case. The USB cable limits the rate. USB1.1 gives 1MB/sec (my Macintosh computer does that! Ugh). USB2.0 gives 30MB/sec (estimate of practical rate). USB3.0 can do 200MB/sec. I don't have any USB3 installed here (not yet at least - card purchased but not installed). Those three drives of yours, can probably do at least 65MB/sec, if they weren't limited by USB2.0 . My computer, a 1000mhz Net Vista IBM from 2000, came with Win2000. I removed the hard drive, and replaced it with my operating Win98 drive from a much slower computer. After adding a few drivers it was back in operation. That 6gb drive was eventually cloned to a 40gb, and had 3 partitions. Later I added another 40gb, which was copied to a 120gb, with also 3 partitions. Now, I have an 80gb for C: thru E: amd 120gb (second drive) for F: thru I: (Each partitions serves a different purpose, with all of the second drive being for storage. C: boots Win98se, D: boots Win2000. This computer had USB 1.0, but I added a card for USB 2.0. (I did not even know there is a version 3 yet). USB 1.0 worked, but was slow to transfer photos from my camera, but USB 2 works fine. You can get a PCI USB3 card. It would be limited to around 100MB/sec by the performance of the PCI bus in the computer. And it's rather expensive as it's a bridged card. Compared to the $25 I just paid for the USB3 card I got. Some day, mine will be running in the 200MB/sec range, as I don't have the right slot for it to go at ~330MB/sec (estimated fastest disk storage possible over USB3, with the right motherboard slot). All my slots are PCI on this conmputer. Just an off thought, I kind of get a laugh, thinking about all this speed I'll gain, compared to my old computer, knowing I'll never gain anything, because I'm limited to dialup internet, which is all I can get where I live (rural farm). Yea, there is the option of getting a satellite dish, but i cant afford Dish Network, nor do I have any interest in their tv programming which is required as part of the package they sell. Been there, done that. We have dialup back home, and I can't even keep up with the Windows Updates for WinXP on that computer. I try to do Windows Update when I go back home, but it's hopeless. Which reminds me, where can I get a download of XP SP3, to burn onto a CD. I wont even try to update online, but I can download an .ISO file from the WIFI at our library, or a local fast food place. Some rural areas, an entrepreneur might be able to set you up with a radio system. My sister uses something like that, and it just might be faster than my Internet. So depending on your neighborhood, all it takes is one motivated person to fix that for you. (As far as I know, it's not a Wifi based system.) I never heard of that radio system, but I doubt it's available here. I cant even get a good cellphone signal from my house, I have to walk up the hill. This is one reason I keep a landline, plus for dialup net. My main goal in getting tyhis newer system to work, is because as I said before, my old computer is getting aa little flakey, where the RAM seems to need attention every few weeks (loses contact), and because I'm kind of being forced to upgrade to XP, because Win98 wont allow any browsers compatible with the web these days. Using older browsers are constantly giving script errors or loading pages wrong. Personally, I like Win98 better than any other OS, Ive used, But I'll have to get used to XP. For some odd reason, my dual booted win2000 partition on this machine refuses to properly connect to the internet. Win98 connects just fine, but not W2000. (with same external modem). I only boot to Win2000 for connecting my USB external drives, since W98 lacks support for most of them. I can connect to the net with Win2000, but the speed is never over 24K, and although I am connected, no data gets transferred after a few minutes. For Win98, you'd look at KernelEx first. That's a way of extending Win98 so you can use slightly more modern software. I expect even KernelEx can't help with the latest browsers though. I don't track Win98, but there should be an extensive history archived in Google Groups for a thing like this. Basically, it'll support certain calls that modern software makes, to fool the software into running. There used to be an article on this in Wikipedia, but it was removed as not being "noteworthy" or something. Utter rubbish. I have Kernal-Ex installed, latest version. I can run Firefox 8.x, however,, it seems to crash when I close it.... weird problem... I also have Firefox 2.x installed. which works fien but is often refused by many websites, and gets way too many script errors. http://kernelex.sourceforge.net/ For USB on Win98, you'd want to look for something like "Maximus Decim". That was something to do with adding USB capability to Win98. I don't know all the details on this, like what USB Classes are supported, whether it's just USB Mass Storage, or includes something else. http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/4360...e-usb-drivers/ I've heard of that, never tried it.... As for dialup modems, they're loads of fun. I own two dialup modems, each purchased for working with different modem pool types. At one time, modems suffered from "spiral of death", where the connection speed would drop and drop with time, until the modem would just hang up the phone. By owning a K56 and an X2 based modem, I could try one or the other, to get away from "spiral of death". I used to connect to FreeNet with one, and the modem pool at work with the other. I get that spiral of death when I try to download anything larger than about 50megs. I just go to the library and DL the big stuff on my laptop. The 24K implies line impairment (assuming this is a 56K modem and not a 33K). It all depends on how "friendly" your phone company is, as to whether they'd help or not. My experience is, look at the wiring in the house first. I've run into two cases now, where it was components inside the house, that adversely affected the modem speed. The lowest speed I used to get, was a drop to 33K when my wiring was bad (corroded wall jack boxes). By removing the phone wiring, and running a single new cable down to the demarc in the basement, I could get 43K as an average figure. In another case, it was a wire damaged as it went through a basement wall, which was the fault. The phone company can be helpful, but they make their money from the service calls where they have to evaluate your house wiring. I didn't need anyone's help, to squeeze a little more out of my phone line. I was surprised to find the contacts on the floor board junction box, with corrosion on them. That's where the static-like noise was coming from. Using the same modem, same computer and same phone line, I usually get around 40,000 to 45,000bps using Win98. My phone block is right below the computer jack I wired it myself, and cleaned the copper from the wires and screws in the main block. Once and awhile I will only get 33k or 38k using Win98se. But the minute I connect with Win2000, I only get 24K at most and while it might download a few newsgroup messages, or open google, but after a few minutes, I get no data transfer at all. (yet I'm still connected). This has been like this for years, I asked on a Win2000 newsgroups years ago, and never got any useful help. Someone told me to shut off the modem and turn it back on, when switching to W2000, I tried that, but nothing changed. I just dont connect to the internet when booted to Win2000 anymore. In soem ways, it appears that the "spiral of death" occurs in about 5 minutes or less when connected under Win2000. I dont disconnect, it just stays connected but no data is transferred. I use Win98 about 99% of the time anyhow. I really only boot to Win2000 to do some USB transfers. In some ways, I do wish I could get a better modem connection in W2000, because I believe I can use more modern browsers. Thanks I don't know why your Win2K was acting up. I think part of my dialup time was spent on Win2K. Probably a bit less time on Win98. I was using a Macintosh back in the Win98 era, and my Win98 PC wasn't the primary go-to machine at the time. I had more software for the Mac. Until support for it was dropped at work. I've even used dialup on WinXP - when my ADSL would stop working, I'd use dialup to reach the website of the ADSL ISP :-) Just to check their status on when they planned to fix it. It beats waiting 45 minutes to reach their tech support as a plain phone call. Paul |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
How do I insrtall XP from scratch?
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:59:28 -0500, Paul wrote: You can get a PCI USB3 card. It would be limited to around 100MB/sec by the performance of the PCI bus in the computer. And it's rather expensive as it's a bridged card. Compared to the $25 I just paid for the USB3 card I got. Some day, mine will be running in the 200MB/sec range, as I don't have the right slot for it to go at ~330MB/sec (estimated fastest disk storage possible over USB3, with the right motherboard slot). All my slots are PCI on this conmputer. This is the bridged PCI to USB3. On the card surface, it goes from PCI to PCI Express (via bridge chip), then PCI Express to USB3 (regular USB3 chio). It's $60. It's a relatively expensive way to connect a USB hard drive at 100MB/sec or so. Card keying is universal, 3.3V or 5V bus. Most regular computers have 5V keying for PCI (all mine do). At least one Mac was 3.3V. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158359 Looks like a limitation, might be a lack of drivers. http://www.startech.com/Cards-Adapte...wer~PCIUSB3S22 Windows XP(32/64-bit) Server 2003(32/64-bit) Server 2008 R2 Vista/Win7/Win8 A similar card here, a reviewer was kind enough to benchmark it. Gets 83MB/sec best case. So didn't even make it to 100MB/sec. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158361 And super-crazy, the same company makes a PCI Express to PCI adapter. I expect you fit a low profile PCI Express card in the top connector, with an x1 connector on the PCI Express card. Otherwise, you could not put the side panel back on the computer. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158190 Which reminds me, where can I get a download of XP SP3, to burn onto a CD. I wont even try to update online, but I can download an .ISO file from the WIFI at our library, or a local fast food place. This would be the .exe version, suitable for slipstreaming and making a new WinXP installer disc. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl...ils.aspx?id=24 And the ISO, for popping in a CD with just SP3 on it, is here. You would install WinXP from its CD first, then pop this CD in and install SP3, (try to) activate (can't activate with IE5), install IE8, then do Windows Update. Very messy. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl....aspx?id=25129 There are more than 100 Windows Updates that come after that, so SP3 doesn't help a whole lot. They could almost afford to make an SP4 before April. April is end of support. On Win2K, they made something called RollUp 1 Revision 2, which was a package of updates past SP4. If they wanted, they could package the Windows Updates since SP3 that way. You could work on this before April. I would recommend going to the library and working on this now. What this allows, is downloading a lot of the Windows Updates to a separate folder on the hard drive. If Windows Update ever stopped functioning, these updates could be applied when re-installing WinXP. That gets you the 100 updates, without doing them over dialup, or not getting them at all. The files themselves come from Microsoft, and the tool just gets the manifest file from Microsoft, and figures out what to download. The Microsoft lawyers would shut them down, if the Windows Update portion was coming from this site. http://forums.wsusoffline.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=411 http://download.wsusoffline.net/ Using the same modem, same computer and same phone line, I usually get around 40,000 to 45,000bps using Win98. My phone block is right below the computer jack I wired it myself, and cleaned the copper from the wires and screws in the main block. Once and awhile I will only get 33k or 38k using Win98se. But the minute I connect with Win2000, I only get 24K at most and while it might download a few newsgroup messages, or open google, but after a few minutes, I get no data transfer at all. (yet I'm still connected). This has been like this for years, I asked on a Win2000 newsgroups years ago, and never got any useful help. Someone told me to shut off the modem and turn it back on, when switching to W2000, I tried that, but nothing changed. I just dont connect to the internet when booted to Win2000 anymore. In soem ways, it appears that the "spiral of death" occurs in about 5 minutes or less when connected under Win2000. I dont disconnect, it just stays connected but no data is transferred. I use Win98 about 99% of the time anyhow. I really only boot to Win2000 to do some USB transfers. In some ways, I do wish I could get a better modem connection in W2000, because I believe I can use more modern browsers. Thanks OK, that suggests the Win2K problem, is the "driver". It's possible to restrict the data rate on a modem. You can operate a 56K modem at 56K max (get maybe 43-45 or so). You can force it down to 33K (and your 24K could be the result). You can force it to standards lower than that. If you listen to the negotiation tone, whole chunks of negotiation are missing. The tones sound different, because the modem is prevented from testing for 56K first. The 33.6K standard, is the "highest rate without tricks". The 56K asymmetric standards rely on analog to digital conversion in one direction, to give better download rates. And your Win98 demonstrates you got a working 56K. So the "trick" is in place. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/56k Modem drivers are very messy. I had no modem driver for WinXP for mine. I think I had to use a "generic" driver on WinXP. I don't know what exists in the way of options for Win2K. So your performance evidence, suggests the driver isn't allowing the upper rate. It could even be, if you examine the Hayes AT commands being sent to the modem, you'd see a command for turning off 56K. When if comes to config, modems are a hair puller. They're great when they're under "full support", and not so great when you have to hack them to get them to run. Some modems, you can also flash upgrade them to the latest modem standard. I doubt that's worth the risk now, as a bricked modem would be pretty hard to replace with something good. Even when I bought my X2 modem, pickings were pretty thin. Good luck, Paul |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
How do I insrtall XP from scratch?
In message , Paul
writes: [] When an interface is "deprecated", it will eventually disappear. (I do hate that word: I come across it when people talk about HTML, for example. CENTER is a lot easier to understand than DIV ...) If at one time, a computer came with four SATA and two IDE (the halcyon days), you cannot expect them to deliver IDE forever. A day will come, when add-on IDE and IDE in general, will be gone. It'll be six SATA and zero IDE after that. And you'll then need an older computer, to recover your data. I _think_ I've seen SATA to EIDE/PATA converters - possibly even bidirectional ones. (Whether they're self-contained or need drivers [and thus an OS already present] I don't know, though I _think_ self-contained.) [] The platters made now, are relatively high capacity. Like 500GB per platter. They may not make platters any more, with small enough capacity to suit the IDE drives. And I've (Couldn't they put the high-capacity platters in the low-capacity drives? Not that I'm saying that'd be a good idea.) seen no effort to ship larger IDE drives. The largest IDE drive ever, was 750GB. And when that one disappeared, they never brought any of those back. Somewhere around 200 or 250 is about the largest IDE you can reasonably expect, with 80GB being a more common option (as a replacement). Paul -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf My daughter is appalled by it at all times, but you know you have to appal your 14-year-old daughter otherwise you're not doing your job as a father. - Richard Osman to Alison Graham, in Radio Times 2013-6-8 to 14 |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
How do I insrtall XP from scratch?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
I _think_ I've seen SATA to EIDE/PATA converters - possibly even bidirectional ones. (Whether they're self-contained or need drivers [and thus an OS already present] I don't know, though I _think_ self-contained.) [] Yes, adapters exist. But the conversion chips, some of the IC companies have stopped making them. Now we're left with some of the "lesser" ICs for the job. In some cases, an adapter that used to have a Marvell chip, might be using a chip with "sun" in the name. And the characteristics might not be the same. The casing on the outside of the adapter might be identical to the known-good model. Always check the customer reviews, to see if the remaining rubbish is worth the money. I have an adapter here, and the one I got works great. But since these things come and go, you need to do the research before pouring money into them. The most funny product offered, is someone pointed out an adapter being sold for $1. When tested, the working rate was zero percent :-) All received goods were dead. It's like buying a hood ornament. The platters made now, are relatively high capacity. Like 500GB per platter. They may not make platters any more, with small enough capacity to suit the IDE drives. And I've (Couldn't they put the high-capacity platters in the low-capacity drives? Not that I'm saying that'd be a good idea.) I don't get the impression they mix and match that easily. As far as I know, the plant that makes platters, only runs two or three capacities at the same time. So if they needed some platters for 40GB drives, they might not be tooled for it. Modern platters might not have the same material stackup (plating). Especially as modern drives are vertical recording (with holder layer underneath) versus the previous horizontal recording technique. The magnetics are different at the head level. Paul |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
How do I insrtall XP from scratch?
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:19:45 -0500, Paul wrote:
wrote: On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 20:59:28 -0500, Paul wrote: Some rural areas, an entrepreneur might be able to set you up with a radio system. My sister uses something like that, and it just might be faster than my Internet. So depending on your neighborhood, all it takes is one motivated person to fix that for you. (As far as I know, it's not a Wifi based system.) I never heard of that radio system, but I doubt it's available here. I cant even get a good cellphone signal from my house, I have to walk up the hill. This is one reason I keep a landline, plus for dialup net. I found an example of a system for rural Internet. They're doing something like this, for a few users in a province in Canada. (In other words, where other systems are more practical, they're connected with something else.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canopy_(wireless) The summary chart at the top, says it can go as far as 120 miles, and uses signals in the 900Mhz band. That's the kind of thing my sister has. It was supposed to use some kind of radio signal. I don't know if that is the exact system or not. Or even the same frequency band. But at least now, I've seen an example of how they would build one. Paul It's an over-the-air system using a small antenna and is quite common in rural Ontario. I have no idea about quality but it is expensive, as I've received blurbs in the mail about the service and its about 2 to 3 times more than hard wired internet and the installation price is quite high. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|