1237a58fe22b
tech



Hello Wayne - 

WC>> Most if not all the apps install as subdirectories of
WC>> Windows like program0~1, ect. ad infinitum :-( 

CA>> This is a potential collision of short filenames within
CA>> the registry too which is not a good thing. :-\ 

WC> Not really, just used as an example, the file names are
WC> unique. 

If you say so. Something to keep in mind as you travel 'the
dark side' though. ;-) 

CA>> I've read numbers as high as 900 meg. 

WC> Messed up I've been so busy, it's 750 Meg just for Windows
WC> directory and near everything loaded into that, 1.1 GIG for
WC> everything now on the drive which still leaves 5 Gig. to do
WC> what I please with. I'm going to split the drive with FIPS
WC> version 2 for 32 bit and allocate 3 - 4 Gig. for Linux
WC> partitions. 

I've known a few who had 'mysterious' hard drive disasters
after repartitioning with FIPS and have, therefore, never used
it myself. 

CA>> You definitely do _not_ want to just delete apps. My
CA>> brother did that without asking me first and disabled his
CA>> computer. (BG) 

WC> I'm using the removal tool provided after being made aware
WC> of it. Funny I _got_ Win 3.1 intuitively and rarely ever
WC> cracked the manual, things are different now. 

Not so much different as unmanageable. I can _find_ parts of
the software and the config files with W31. With W9x the
attempt seems futile. 

CA>> Even old W31 won't allow a simple deletion of Internet
CA>> Explorer v5.x without creating a disaster. :-\ 

WC> You have to be careful to _remove_ the right stuff,
WC> directories\*.* executables and such but not certain DLL's
WC> that may be used by other applications. 

If I remember correctly W31 v5.x of Inernet Explorer even
writes entries into the REG.DAT of W31 (not often done by other
software) that will cause problems. I seem to recall trying to
edit them out and finally just replacing REG.DAT with a backup
copy. 

CA>> I'm thinking that when I move to W9x or newer I will need
CA>> to buy the full install CDs or live with the garbage until
CA>> such time that I can wipe the drive and install from full
CA>> CDs. 

WC> Even with most of the garbage still there it performs well
WC> but the default desktop needs customizing beyond belief. 

I like W98SE on the proper hardware with enough memory for it's
use. Other people's systems are a bit bloated with far too many
useless and unused icons on their desktop making it look really
stupid (to me). No one bothers to organize their 'start' menus
so that there is no easy way to find anything (even for them).
Most spend time changing colors, desktop pix, and often (a
really bad move) animated cursors. 

WC>> Gotta ask in Win9x echo what the file is to modify
WC>> bootgui=0 so it boots to DOS. 

CA>> You have to change attributes on C:\MSDOS.SYS, edit, then
CA>> change them back again. 

WC> MSDOS.SYS? Wouldn't think you'd know this one for 9x? I'll
WC> give it a shot. 

I've used W9x over the years at work and at home but not on my
personal equipment. I know a few things about W9x and am
abysmally ignorant of other things. 

WC> BTW were you aware that "attrib," with the comma will strip
WC> all attributes of a named file? 

No I did not. Sounds like a bug that has been elevated to a
'feature'. ;-) 

WC> Actually you can using another switch strip all attributes
WC> from every file on the drive with one command. 

The "/s" switch? 

--8<--cut 

WC> I found a dialer in all that mess that works fine. Now
WC> logging on at 50.6K. Best speed on downloading a 33 meg
WC> file, Netscape 7.0 was 50.11KB/sec. 

That's a _very_ fast dialup connect if the software is
reporting the speed accurately. I don't think I've ever seen or
heard of one that fast. You must be sitting on top of the phone
companies equipment with an 8 foot connection. :-) 

WC> Read a report that advances in methodology promises to up
WC> DSL speeds over _copper_ lines to 5X - 50X what is
WC> presently available, this is cool because this will support
WC> HDTV!!! Fiber optic feeds will need to be sent to junctions
WC> up to 4,000 feet from the copper to residence hookups
WC> however. I think I'm within 4,000 feet of the Ph. Co as
WC> things stand now. 

The FCC has indirectly limited actual rates to 53k for the US.
If they lift that restriction speeds could increase, yes. 

CA>> That is one way. Using BasicLinux is also available. 

WC> Not transfered to this machine yet but the packages are on
WC> tape so it'll be easy to install. In the next 90 - 120 days
WC> I'll send off check to Internet Junction paying a year in
WC> advance and cutting my ISP costs in half and likely solving
WC> my SMTP problem in Linux. 

My only problem is satisfying my ISP for a connect. Once online
all of BasicLinux works with no problems here. ISPs aren't
regulated that I know of and can really be a pita when they get
some 'new' idea and try to implement it without sound
professional advice. 

WC>> One thing's for sure the latest and greatest Linux should
WC>> run on this machine and I'm looking forward to getting
WC>> Netscape installed so I can snag the Dillo browser, mail,
WC>> word processor, ect. 

CA>> If you have StarOffice or OpenOffice in mind I think they
CA>> both require 128 meg of memory to use them. :-\ 

WC> Big deal, the big hurdle was the machine itself, memory is
WC> cheap these days and I'm thinking about maxing this box out
WC> to 256 Meg. RAM. 

I'm inclined to want 512meg if I'm going to bother swapping
memory in/out but after asking about memory limits in the W95
echo and getting no replies I'm not clear as to what OS will
use 512meg and what OS will just ignore more than 256meg. 

WC> I'll bet those other apps can be run with a swap file too. 

That's a possibility I suppose but might slow them down a bit. 

WC> Also I don't plan on using either of those apps but another
WC> less resource hungry word processor whose name escapes me
WC> at the moment but IIRC can save files in MSWord format. 

The most recent discussions about BL2 on the elist revolved
around MSWord support. MSW isn't even compatible with other
versions of MSW. I think the consensus is that RTF is more
likely to be compatible but even that is not 100% and has
limitations. 

WC> What I'm going to be doing in the next few weeks is
WC> checking out USB CD-ROM read-writers. 

You may want to verify that you have USB 2? 

CA>> The latest and greatest is not one Linux but several
CA>> depending which person you talk to. Multiple 'distros'
CA>> from multiple sources that are not compatible with one
CA>> another. Much like Windows versions the installed size
CA>> grows along with that to as much as 900meg for everything.
CA>> :-) 

WC> There's a German fellows release that employs Dillo
WC> graphical browser and the above refered to word processor
WC> on a Redhad small footprint, 350 Meg, installation. 

You might want to ask Steven Darnolds on the survpc elist about
Dillo. He has recently been looking at various Linux browsers
and might have a more objective opinion as to it's
usefulness/speed/etc. 

WC> 3 plus Gig gives me plenty of room. I'll likely install
WC> three distros, Redhat, Slackware and Mandrake then later
WC> make up my mind which best suits. Probably actually install
WC> that small footprint Redhat with all the important goodies
WC> first on the new machine as I should be able to, with
WC> patience and over a week's time download the entire thing
WC> with the 56K modem. 

My 2 cents fwiw is that the 'best' Linux is the one that most
of the people you know use. My other criteria would be that
they won't disappear for whatever reason right in the middle of
my next disaster just when I need their help. If you read
between the lines you will notice that those who enjoy Linux
and get the most from it have a real live person or person(s)
willing to come to their home and discuss Linux and assist in
troubleshooting various installs. 

CA>> One reason Steven Darnolds decided to use SlackWare v7.1
CA>> for the new BasicLinux version 2 is that after v7.1 apps
CA>> and libraries began to bloat in size and execute slowler
CA>> on lesser hardware. 

WC> I've now 2 decent machines so no problem. Likely though
WC> I'll try relocating that fast UART to my working 486 board
WC> way down the road when I've the time to play and try to
WC> install a sufficiently versitile Linux on it and what will
WC> become it's 325 meg drive when I replace the NEC's current
WC> one. 

An internal modem would save you much grief in that regard (my
2 cents). 

CA>> Keep in mind recent Linux, Windows, and others are being
CA>> written for 2ghz machines now with installed memory on
video cards that can be 32 meg just for the video. 

WC> Not worried, 8 Meg on my video card will do for now and if
WC> not I'll disable the onboard in CMOS and use up a slot. 

My brother has 8 meg on his video card and it seems to be
sufficient for his uses. Streaming video is 'iffy' but I
suspect that is the combination of winmodem and a poorly
configured OS. 

WC> I'll NEVER be running Win XP having seen that crud on my
WC> landladies computer. 

I won't say never but I will say I will be kicking and
screaming all the way to the end before using XP on anything
ever. 

CA>> Sizes of updates, patch files, and applications that are
CA>> 'free' are also increasing in size because close to half
CA>> the population seem to have DSL connects and 80meg hard
CA>> drives now and won't complain. 

WC> I've an ethernet card just waiting to be used for DSL when
WC> I get some other matters sorted out. I'd kinda like to down
WC> the road run a server on the web perhaps utilizing BL 1.8
WC> or 7.1 on the old klunky 486 if I manage to get it up and
WC> running again. Buy one of those boxes that intercepts call
WC> waiting and puts a modem and dialup on hold while releasing
WC> the line for voice and have the Pentium machine on DSL and
WC> leaving the server up on the 486 with 56K hardware modem.
WC> Long range plans that may or may not occur. 

I have similar 'plans' but am in no hurry. After operating a
BBS for some years and supporting two personal websites for
over a year going on two I am questioning just how many of my
remaining hours need be spent giving free assistance to people
who really don't seem all that appreciative. My time might be
put to better use in a soup kitchen or driving a 'meals on
wheels' thing around? 

CA>> Many apps are in the 30-60 meg range and would take from
2-4 hours to download on a dialup. 

WC> NS 7.0, 33 Meg., at 50K DL came down in an an hour 50
WC> minutes approximately. 

So my 2 hours was close. :-) 

WC> Software modem works great but takes an unacceptably long
WC> time to initiate logon, some 30 seconds :-( OTOH
WC> downloading MultiMail for 9X was a few seconds. 

Winmodems are not desirable but yes, they do seem to work on
newer hardware. 

CA>> Not that it can't be done unattended, it can, but you need
CA>> an _uninterrupted_ 2-4 hours of connection or the ability
CA>> to 'resume' where you were disconnected. Resume has to be
CA>> available from your side and the sender. 

WC> I fairly often ran into that and have on my older machine,
WC> Netscape's dialer reports some really impressive false
WC> download speeds until it catches on ;-) 

Yes, theoretical maximum transfer rates are often exceeded by
the reported tranfer rates of much of our software. I would
prefer the software log the rates and present me with a
timeline average so that I can see when it is best for those
large transfers (if there is such a thing as best time on the
Internet). 

WC> Anyway that's another thing, Netscape does have a dialer
WC> for 9x I can download but I'll have to look into the matter
WC> of it accessing the soft modem driver. 

It should work. I think the winmodem 'looks' like a real modem
to most (if not all) Windows software. 

WC> Hopefully it'll be supported, Rockwell HCL something or
WC> other software modem. Need to see if this modem is
WC> supported in Linux and if there's a readme in the .tgz 

This is confusing (to me). Rockwell had a combo hard/soft modem
years ago that would even work for DOS. It had drivers for both
DOS and Windows. I had the impression Rockwell abanadoned that
design in favor of the winmodem (Windows only) and the little
bit I've read about Linux lead me to think Linux was only
attempting to support the latter (DOS compatible Rockwells) and
not the winmodems? 

>
>        ,                                        ,
>      o/      Charles_Angelich  - DOS Ghost       \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >  www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/faf/  < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01