O.T. Computer Cleaning Maintenance:

As you say, removing cards is an option but
I think we can safely remove the dial-up card
and wire to the sound card and toss it and use
my one blank tab to cover it. That will at least
free up space for more air circulation.

In passing, I thought I would use the tab as a
template and make others out of sheet metal in
case we decided to removed the sound card or I
could use wire mesh for air flow and tape the
edges with duck tape(just in case).

Here's the before/after RAM

http://i58.tinypic.com/m9vckj.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/2ue4n7o.jpg

I believe I have 1GB for the 8200 although I've
heard that 2GB is Max.

There's another question that puzzles me. As I said
I don't use the 8200 much but I've downloaded new
programs you've given me e.g Agent Ransack and files
and such and I've noticed the time is much faster than
the 8500. Not in the transfer of the files but the
actual download time and I was wondering why that is?

Is it because the 8500 has so much on it and the 8500
doesn't?


Thanks,
Robert

I had a better idea; I still have my 486
tower that I now use as a pedestal for the
8500. So I opened it up and took out it's
tabs and screws. After all these years it
still had some use. I wonder if I could use
it's fan if mine ever gave out or other parts?
Probably too old.

Since I had it opened up I thought you'd be
interested:

http://i60.tinypic.com/296dksh.jpg

http://i61.tinypic.com/2i1382b.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/347tuuu.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/2jd3nsm.jpg

http://i57.tinypic.com/dbqgyo.jpg

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
I had a better idea; I still have my 486
tower that I now use as a pedestal for the
8500. So I opened it up and took out it's
tabs and screws. After all these years it
still had some use. I wonder if I could use
it's fan if mine ever gave out or other parts?
Probably too old.

Since I had it opened up I thought you'd be
interested:

http://i60.tinypic.com/296dksh.jpg

http://i61.tinypic.com/2i1382b.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/347tuuu.jpg

http://i58.tinypic.com/2jd3nsm.jpg

http://i57.tinypic.com/dbqgyo.jpg

Robert

Some of the mechanical parts on computer cases,
are unique and not all that transferable from
one computer to the next. There is more than
one slot cover design for example, and you
could easily find one which doesn't fit the
other machine properly. For example, I have a machine
that the slot covers use "spring fingers" and no screws.
The slot cover is a spring loaded, interference fit,
and you just push it into place to block a PCI hole.

The other thing that tends to be unique, is the
standoff mechanism under the motherboard. There's
at least 20 different designs for those, and
the standoffs that come with a computer case,
stay with that computer case. Those parts
would only cause trouble if you try to reuse them.
Sometimes the threads are the same, but the
screw length is different. And causes a "Bad fit"
if placed in some other computer case.

Only if you have two identical cases, are the odds
good of sharing parts between them.

I have one computer case here, where the bag of screws
that came with it, some of the screws have no threads.
A machinist in North America would faint on the spot,
if shown garbage like that :-) But somehow, they managed
to sweep defective parts off the floor, and include
them in the bag of screws for my computer case. Naturally,
I ran a little short.

I don't have anything 486 era here. I started with Unix
and Macintosh, and only later in life worked with PCs.
So 440BX and P3 is where I started on PCs. I think
the slowest PC I've ever worked with, was 6MHz, and it
was actually manufactured by my company (but not by me).
Worked OK. 6Mhz didn't seem so slow back then :-)

Paul

Mark Twain wrote:
As you say, removing cards is an option but
I think we can safely remove the dial-up card
and wire to the sound card and toss it and use
my one blank tab to cover it. That will at least
free up space for more air circulation.

In passing, I thought I would use the tab as a
template and make others out of sheet metal in
case we decided to removed the sound card or I
could use wire mesh for air flow and tape the
edges with duck tape(just in case).

Here's the before/after RAM

http://i58.tinypic.com/m9vckj.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/2ue4n7o.jpg

I believe I have 1GB for the 8200 although I've
heard that 2GB is Max.

There's another question that puzzles me. As I said
I don't use the 8200 much but I've downloaded new
programs you've given me e.g Agent Ransack and files
and such and I've noticed the time is much faster than
the 8500. Not in the transfer of the files but the
actual download time and I was wondering why that is?

Is it because the 8500 has so much on it and the 8500
doesn't?


Thanks,
Robert

Yeah, I don't know if 2GB RAMBUS 16-bit RIMM configurations
are supported or not. The "expert" on this stuff, used
to claim there was a length limit to the serial communications
channel, so it would do 24 chips in a row (512MB RIMM and
256MB RIMM), but would be unstable with 32 chips (two 512MB
RIMM modules on the same channel). In the year 2015, it would be
pretty difficult to track down good info. Maybe some 850 chipset
documentation would have the answer. Or maybe if you used
slower RAM, you could run a total of 4x512MB.

For its time, RAMBUS was considered fast, and beat the competing
DIMM technology. But RAMBUS as a company, made themselves
unpopular enough (patent and licensing warfare), that the
industry attempted to get as far away from them as possible.
I think some RAMBUS memories might have been used later
in some game consoles, but for PCs, it was the end of the
road.

*******

With regard to comparing the 8500 download behavior to the
8200, I'd have to be standing there, to even begin to guess
at what is going on. While you have AV software scanning
the downloads, that shouldn't interfere with the download
speed. I take it occasionally, on the 8500, you open Task Manager
(control-alt-delete or from the TaskBar, right-click), and
watch the CPU utilization.

I occasionally have issues here, where Firefox goes into a loop
and uses up one of my two CPU cores on the E8400 CPU. And I
can sometimes notice a slight difference in some other thing
I'm doing, that alerts me that something is going on. But the
processor on your 8500 is a lot stronger than mine, and even
a runaway program, you shouldn't really notice that on it.

Generally, the routers give equal shares to the various things
plugged into them, so I doubt that's the problem.

Paul

Luckily, the tabs and screws are the same on
both so I can use them. One other thing of note
was that the 486 was heavier than hell. *L*

Oh I also found a anti-static bag.

So our procedure is to:

1. install the new video card
2. remove the dial-up card and
wire to sound card and put a
blank tab in it's place.

Then if all goes ok,

3.load the drivers(will it prompt
me? If not what's the procedure?)
4.test card temperature with the
GPU-Z link

correct?

Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
Luckily, the tabs and screws are the same on
both so I can use them. One other thing of note
was that the 486 was heavier than hell. *L*

Oh I also found a anti-static bag.

So our procedure is to:

1. install the new video card
2. remove the dial-up card and
wire to sound card and put a
blank tab in it's place.

Then if all goes ok,

3.load the drivers(will it prompt
me? If not what's the procedure?)
4.test card temperature with the
GPU-Z link

correct?

Robert

The OS has two drivers. The OS has a built-in VESA
driver. It uses that when the manufacturer driver
is missing. That is why you can see the computer
screen, just after the new video card is installed.
Because the OS installs the VESA driver to make
the new card work.

You can tell it is using the VESA driver, because
the "screen is scrunched". It doesn't operate at
full resolution. It is too cramped, to work on
the computer that way.

When you buy a video card, if it is retail-boxed,
the box contains an installation CD. Once the OS
is booted, and you're seeing the smaller-than-normal
desktop display, you can insert the CD in the optical
drive, and install the driver.

Now, for brand new cards (ones released within the last
month say), the driver on the CD may be a bad driver,
and not work well. In which case, for an NVidia card
you would go to the website and get a driver update.
So you can also download a driver from the website,
if the driver on the CD is not working.

For my most recent video card purchase, the drivers
on the CD in the box worked well, so there was no rush
to download anything further.

*******

Normally, you try to remove the old driver, before installing
the new card. I learned this the hard way. I had a computer
with three different brands of cards in it )possinly NVidia,
ATI, Matrox), and eventually, something happened to the registry,
where no games would enter 3D mode any more. I tried all sorts
of stuff to fix it, but because I never removed the old drivers,
things were a mess. I used some "driver cleaner" programs at the time,
but whatever was broken in the Registry, just wasn't getting
fixed. So I had to repair install the OS to fix it.

Since I changed practices, to remove the old driver, before installing
the new card, I haven't run into a similar situation. Skipping this
process for one card swap, probably won't hurt, but I learned my
lesson after trying three different cards. And then something broke.

Paul

Il giorno Thu 09 Jul 2015 02:18:37a, *Ken Blake, MVP* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio
. Vediamo cosa scrisse:

Because both have fewer users, and malware writers target the most
popular systems, there may be a somewhat lower risk of infection. But
in both cases, the risk is far from zero


anyway, 0.01% against is far better than 99.99%

in 5+ years, with 3+ computers running LXLE, I never got one of those
malware

OTOH, at work, every other day I must run and clean computers from
infections (the last two were cryptolocker); and *yes*, they had antivirus,
antimalware, antieverything installed & running


--
/-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\
-=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=-
http://www.bb2002.it
............ [ al lavoro ] ...........

Il giorno Fri 10 Jul 2015 12:10:31p, *Ammammata* inviava su
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general il messaggio
. 189. Vediamo cosa
scrisse:


in 5+ years, with 3+ computers running LXLE, I never got one of those
malware



I run a w7 computer too... I never got anything bad on it because there is
the most important anti-everything active: the brain

--
/-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\
-=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=-
http://www.bb2002.it
............ [ al lavoro ] ...........

Hell Paul,

I'm still waiting on the Video card but today
I had an issue with my Flash Player where everything
froze up. I checked my plug-ins and sure enough it
was the Shockwave Flash Plugin.

http://i57.tinypic.com/34z0cno.jpg

In fact, to even get the above link I had to accept the
Flash Player.

I haven't done anything yet because I wanted to check
with you first and I did read up on it but I use Flash
Player allot. Is there a way around this?

Thanks,
Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
Hell Paul,

I'm still waiting on the Video card but today
I had an issue with my Flash Player where everything
froze up. I checked my plug-ins and sure enough it
was the Shockwave Flash Plugin.

http://i57.tinypic.com/34z0cno.jpg

In fact, to even get the above link I had to accept the
Flash Player.

I haven't done anything yet because I wanted to check
with you first and I did read up on it but I use Flash
Player allot. Is there a way around this?

Thanks,
Robert

Weird.

The Flash page still lists 203 as the current one.

https://www.adobe.com/products/flash...ribution3.html

*******

OK, I checked my browser that has Flash 18.0.0.203 and it says:

Version: 18.0.0.203
State: Enabled (STATE_VULNERABLE_NO_UPDATE)

So there is no update available right now!

That means there is a problem, and if you visit any
dodgy sites right now, they could take over using Flash.

And the thing is, when the Hack Team site was looted,
they got sample code for exploits. So the bad guys have
a "head start" on this one. And Adobe, while working
quickly, is having trouble keeping up.

This is why the industry needs to finish the transition
off Flash and to HTML5. It's not that HTML5 is bullet proof
or anything, but if exploits are made for it, some browsers
will be fixed before others, meaning users will flock
to the "best maintained" browser.

*******

Doubly weird...

The status page says the current version is 18.0.0.209

http://www.adobe.com/software/flash/about/

And i just reloaded this page, and the new version is up!

Is that service or what ? Get your copy of 18.0.0.209 here.

https://www.adobe.com/products/flash...ribution3.html

Windows Plugin-based browsers Download EXE Installer

https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/ge..._18_plugin.exe

Before you click the download link, you can rename your old
installer download, to show it was 18_0_0_203. I put the release
number in the file name of mine, so I can tell them apart later.

And I'm downloading 209, while sending this post...

HTH,
Paul

That did it! Thanks. I didn't rename the file
before hand though.

Just curious, since we were talking about problems
by not deleting the prior program with the video
cards, should I have deleted the Adobe program first
before downloading? Although it didn't prompt me with
any overwrites?

In addition, I've already removed the dial-up
card and replaced it with a blank tab.

Thanks,
Robert

Mark Twain wrote:
That did it! Thanks. I didn't rename the file
before hand though.

Just curious, since we were talking about problems
by not deleting the prior program with the video
cards, should I have deleted the Adobe program first
before downloading? Although it didn't prompt me with
any overwrites?

In addition, I've already removed the dial-up
card and replaced it with a blank tab.

Thanks,
Robert

No, the Flash don't seem to need any attention.
Just run your EXE installer and it'll take care of
the job.

I'm not a fan of the web based update method, because
there is a possibility of a prompt being faked, and
also there are enough reports of update failures, I can't
be bothered to even try it this way.

That's why I like the EXE - so far, no complaints here.

Paul

Hello Paul,

The video card came and I installed it; the previous
card had a green plastic clip that ran all the way
around the base and I had to unclip it before the card
would release.

However everything seemed to go OK with the new card
and powered up fine. I reset the resolution so this
Is what it looks like:

http://i62.tinypic.com/ek0y86.jpg

then this came up:

http://i61.tinypic.com/260rhjo.jpg

I followed it along but I have no idea where to look
for updates?

http://i58.tinypic.com/6rrdx0.jpg

So its still not fully installed?

I then downloaded and ran GPU-Z

http://i60.tinypic.com/2ce4rc1.gif

http://i58.tinypic.com/2m7jiwl.gif

http://i57.tinypic.com/2eceqlv.gif

http://i60.tinypic.com/15noiyp.gif


Thoughts/Suggestions?

Thanks,
Robert

Mark Twain wrote:

Hello Paul,

The video card came and I installed it; the previous
card had a green plastic clip that ran all the way
around the base and I had to unclip it before the card
would release.

However everything seemed to go OK with the new card
and powered up fine. I reset the resolution so this
Is what it looks like:

http://i62.tinypic.com/ek0y86.jpg

then this came up:

http://i61.tinypic.com/260rhjo.jpg

I followed it along but I have no idea where to look
for updates?

http://i58.tinypic.com/6rrdx0.jpg

So its still not fully installed?

I then downloaded and ran GPU-Z

http://i60.tinypic.com/2ce4rc1.gif

http://i58.tinypic.com/2m7jiwl.gif

http://i57.tinypic.com/2eceqlv.gif

http://i60.tinypic.com/15noiyp.gif


Thoughts/Suggestions?

Thanks,
Robert


I see you grabbed the "branded" version of GPU-Z.
That has a couple tabs that wouldn't be on the other
one. I generally go for the non-branded utilities.

You need an NVidia driver. You're on WinXP.

Once the driver is in place, the temperature sensor should
appear in GPUZ.

The ven_10DE dev_0221 confirms it is a 6200 card.

On this page, under Supported Devices, I can see 6200.
And it's supposed to be a WinXP driver.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_175.19_whql.html

http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp-2...ql-driver.html

The highest revision I can find, is 307.83 WHQL for WinXP from 2013.
On geforce.com, by manual selection. Geforce.com is an
NVidia site, and where they send you for drivers. I found
those other links, using an "archive" search.

*******

Now, I just checked my WinXP setup, and I'm actually
running 175.19 for my NVidia 7900 family card. So
I can vouch for that one. I haven't bothered to update
the driver in some time. That should be good enough.

So this is what I'm running right now. For the older
cards, they stop updating the code after a while,
which is why a newer driver won't necessarily help
with older cards like 6200 or 7900.

But it's you choice, if you want to hunt down a newer
one, like from the year 2013.

With any luck, the new NVidia driver will remove the
old one. Your 45.xx release.

*******

And since everything is coming back up properly,
then there must be a problem with the AGP card
you just pulled. Have you examined it yet ?
Is the fan blade on the card jammed, or does
the blade turn freely ?

Paul

After I had the card installed and brought most of it
up to date (except the drivers) I used your links to
upgrade Adobe Flash Player/Plugin.

I then ran the latest Nvidia driver download you provided
and installed it.

I don't quite know what you mean when you say 'Is the
fan blade on the card jammed, or does the blade turn
freely?

If your speaking of the top fan (the one I nudge occasionally)
It turns freely. I also noticed its allot easier starting the
8200 than before.

Here's the old card:

http://i61.tinypic.com/2lu9s3q.jpg

http://i59.tinypic.com/1jpycp.jpg