O/T win2000 ? advice.
Discussion
Hi guys, any pc experts out there?
I've just built a new pc.Athlon 1800 processor,seagate 40 G/bS HDD,soundblaster live 5.1., gforce mx400.Win2000 professional
I've loaded all my software on, all ok except my usb card reader which is a PC world PC Line, device .
Software loads ok, re-boot pc, then plug in reader, comes back with "searching for disc drives", then "Found new hardware", dialogue box appears saying disk drive, but then no more. tried uninstalling and reinstalling, but just the same, device manager shows usb drives in and working, but obviously not, in "my computer" new drives not shown.
Incidentally, this has worked before on this system, but I have had cause to reinstall Win 2000. Any Ideas you guys.
Incidentally I called the 75p per minute help line, and was asked "are you sure it's win 2000" AAARRGGGHHH.
There must be more intelligent life on earth.
Thanks in anticipation
Regards
Big Rumbly
I've just built a new pc.Athlon 1800 processor,seagate 40 G/bS HDD,soundblaster live 5.1., gforce mx400.Win2000 professional
I've loaded all my software on, all ok except my usb card reader which is a PC world PC Line, device .
Software loads ok, re-boot pc, then plug in reader, comes back with "searching for disc drives", then "Found new hardware", dialogue box appears saying disk drive, but then no more. tried uninstalling and reinstalling, but just the same, device manager shows usb drives in and working, but obviously not, in "my computer" new drives not shown.
Incidentally, this has worked before on this system, but I have had cause to reinstall Win 2000. Any Ideas you guys.
Incidentally I called the 75p per minute help line, and was asked "are you sure it's win 2000" AAARRGGGHHH.
There must be more intelligent life on earth.
Thanks in anticipation
Regards
Big Rumbly
The way I'm reading this is that you're installing SW first then attaching HW so...
One thing to try, but a pure guess at this stage, Is to uninstall software. Plug in reader switch on. It will then detect HW then install drivers with "have disk" option. I know it shouldn't make any difference but had a similar problem setting up someone elses PC and doing that way round worked. (never figured out why)
One thing to try, but a pure guess at this stage, Is to uninstall software. Plug in reader switch on. It will then detect HW then install drivers with "have disk" option. I know it shouldn't make any difference but had a similar problem setting up someone elses PC and doing that way round worked. (never figured out why)
Funnily enough, my USB card reader used to do this regularly under Win2k.
In the end I copied the driver directory to the C: drive and the next time it asked me for drivers, I pointed to that location.
Occasionally, I still get the 'new hardwaere found' thing, but now the drivers are present on the disk, it picks them up without intervention and then just carries on as normal..
In the end I copied the driver directory to the C: drive and the next time it asked me for drivers, I pointed to that location.
Occasionally, I still get the 'new hardwaere found' thing, but now the drivers are present on the disk, it picks them up without intervention and then just carries on as normal..
quote:Evidently
I'd throw Win2k in the bin and use '98....but then again I'm no expert with these things
Win2k is Microsoft's best operating system - it's much more stable and able than Windows 98 - the payoff being it's somewhat more expensive and complex.
XP is worse than Win2k. It's basically Win2k with a new front end where nothing is in the same place as it used to be, there's DRM stuff to stop you trading MP3, AVI, MPG files, then there's the online registration process which is a sick joke.
big rumbly - might sound obvious but have u got all the latest w2k service packs and athlon firmware cos theres loads of probs with both and usb with early releases - good site:
www.usbman.com/Win2000.htm
I use w2k at the office and love it - have just put xp on at home and its basically w2k with teletubbies front end.
www.usbman.com/Win2000.htm
I use w2k at the office and love it - have just put xp on at home and its basically w2k with teletubbies front end.
(deep breath)
OK, let's get the USB problem out of the way. Easiest thing to do is to get on to the manufacturer's website and download the LATEST drivers for Win2K - don't mess around with trying to thatch a Win9x driver to work - or ultimately you may run into problems. When the file has downloaded, extract it into a new folder (as CarZee correctly states) and then go through the hardware wizard in Win2K to add it. If it detects it, then point to YOUR folder for the drivers - if it has them already it will simply give you the same error. This should fix it, and you will see the additional driver letter appear under Explorer.
If it still doesn't work, drop me another line.
Secondly, concerning XP: my thoughts so far:
It is more stable and loads quicker than Win2K, although much of the source code was a natural evolution of Win2K. There are some really nice little features inside both flavours, and you can mostly disable undesirable ones. I personally won't have a word said against it, and I venture those that mock simply have not tried it, or have but not sufficiently specced kit. It IS more resource intensive than 2K, particularly CPU.
The only downside I have found is that some modems under XP don't appear stable, particularly the so called "software" modems, which rely on boatloads of CPU availability. Simple solution, buy a proper modem.
Hope this helps
OK, let's get the USB problem out of the way. Easiest thing to do is to get on to the manufacturer's website and download the LATEST drivers for Win2K - don't mess around with trying to thatch a Win9x driver to work - or ultimately you may run into problems. When the file has downloaded, extract it into a new folder (as CarZee correctly states) and then go through the hardware wizard in Win2K to add it. If it detects it, then point to YOUR folder for the drivers - if it has them already it will simply give you the same error. This should fix it, and you will see the additional driver letter appear under Explorer.
If it still doesn't work, drop me another line.
Secondly, concerning XP: my thoughts so far:
It is more stable and loads quicker than Win2K, although much of the source code was a natural evolution of Win2K. There are some really nice little features inside both flavours, and you can mostly disable undesirable ones. I personally won't have a word said against it, and I venture those that mock simply have not tried it, or have but not sufficiently specced kit. It IS more resource intensive than 2K, particularly CPU.
The only downside I have found is that some modems under XP don't appear stable, particularly the so called "software" modems, which rely on boatloads of CPU availability. Simple solution, buy a proper modem.
Hope this helps
quote:Why? Because you can get round it?
...then there's the online registration process which is a sick joke.
Nope - because when you swap components in your machine, you have to re-register the damned software and it wont work until you have..
Remember Marshy's rant about OfficeXP? WinXP is exactly the same..
Oh and if I want I can use a Select CD - which means I avoid the registration process completely - there's still no reason whatsoever to move from Win2K to XP
quote:So let me get this right - it's faster than Win2k, but is more CPU intensive? que??
Secondly, concerning XP: my thoughts so far:
It is more stable and loads quicker than Win2K, although much of the source code was a natural evolution of Win2K. There are some really nice little features inside both flavours, and you can mostly disable undesirable ones. I personally won't have a word said against it, and I venture those that mock simply have not tried it, or have but not sufficiently specced kit. It IS more resource intensive than 2K, particularly CPU.
And if you think my kit isn't well specced then......
I work with MS stuff all the time but I ain't gonna suck BillG's nob.. XP is a cynical exploitation of Microsofts market domination & nothing more.
The forthcoming server version OTOH is a different kettle of fish, with all the new .NET stuff in it..
quote:
[Remember Marshy's rant about OfficeXP? WinXP is exactly the same..
Er, Marshy's rant was about XP, old chap, if my memory serves.
quote:
Oh and if I want I can use a Select CD - which means I avoid the registration process completely - there's still no reason whatsoever to move from Win2K to XP
Until you install XP SP1......then see what happens.
Thanks for the replies gents,
GREG, I can't go to the manufactures web site, cos there is'nt one. One bit of info I got fron the helpline was that the product was only designed to be released at R1.0, so no new updates/drivers. They also said they did,nt support Win2000, although the box say's it's compatible.
I'll try all the advice below and reprt back
Cheers.
GREG, I can't go to the manufactures web site, cos there is'nt one. One bit of info I got fron the helpline was that the product was only designed to be released at R1.0, so no new updates/drivers. They also said they did,nt support Win2000, although the box say's it's compatible.
I'll try all the advice below and reprt back
Cheers.
With regards to all this 9x/W2K/XP business I am pretty much with CarZee I reckon.
9x isnt even worth considering due mainly to the fact that it cant handle memory in any way shape or form.
W2K, halfway house on the 9x/NT convergence I believe. Basically NT with GDI+ and Active Directory as far as I can make out, mine has 5 9's uptime so I am quite happy with that.
XP, it is quicker but I cant get used to the cuddly feel of it at all, I know you can run it in 'classic' mode but the damned thing is always trying to be so helpful and the vast majority of the time it just complicates matter further. All the inbuilt sales features are crap as well, the CD burning software is about as much use as a [insert similie here].
On the whole though I think I will be on W2K for quite some time yet.
Matt.
9x isnt even worth considering due mainly to the fact that it cant handle memory in any way shape or form.
W2K, halfway house on the 9x/NT convergence I believe. Basically NT with GDI+ and Active Directory as far as I can make out, mine has 5 9's uptime so I am quite happy with that.
XP, it is quicker but I cant get used to the cuddly feel of it at all, I know you can run it in 'classic' mode but the damned thing is always trying to be so helpful and the vast majority of the time it just complicates matter further. All the inbuilt sales features are crap as well, the CD burning software is about as much use as a [insert similie here].
On the whole though I think I will be on W2K for quite some time yet.
Matt.
Greg how have you found the XP firewall? I agree XP is a lot more stable and functions quicker (on a system that is quick anyway). However have had "loads of fun" trying to get the XP firewall functioning correctly ie trying a broadband internet sharing system accross a small LAN (2 computers) we found that unusual glitches appeared. eg using gamevoice the XP machine could host a GV session and everyone could join it EXCEPT the XP machine that was hosting it!!!
Some on-line games we have found are intermittent with communication sometimes dropping out completely. A "pleasant" evening on the phone trying different combinations and we found the best solution was to turn off all firewalls on XP machines on the LAN, and install a seperate firewall on the server machine.
I personally use win98SE although it does have problems occasionally (its freeing memory system after closing an application is awful). XP is better but I'm waiting for XP Second Edition (which I'm sure is on its way).
>> Edited by smeagol on Thursday 1st August 15:40
Some on-line games we have found are intermittent with communication sometimes dropping out completely. A "pleasant" evening on the phone trying different combinations and we found the best solution was to turn off all firewalls on XP machines on the LAN, and install a seperate firewall on the server machine. I personally use win98SE although it does have problems occasionally (its freeing memory system after closing an application is awful). XP is better but I'm waiting for XP Second Edition (which I'm sure is on its way).
>> Edited by smeagol on Thursday 1st August 15:40
quote:So let me get this right - it's faster than Win2k, but is more CPU intensive? que??
On bootup, and from hibernation / standby, absolutely. It is more CPU intensive (I'm running it on 2 machines, and both show a lot of CPU activity, mostly down to system realted stuff)
quote:
And if you think my kit isn't well specced then......
Ade, since when were we talking about your kit ? From what you've posted, being shafted by all these Northern monkey suppliers I'm surprised you've got one at all
quote:
I work with MS stuff all the time but I ain't gonna suck BillG's nob.. XP is a cynical exploitation of Microsofts market domination & nothing more.
And presumably you forgot to mention the fact that it now unifies the codebase, thus reducing development costs for both MS and OEM's ? That it now provides home users (at last) with a proper multi threaded, stable, Win2K based true 32 bit operating system ? Market domination - no, sorry CarZ, I don't buy it. MS people will buy MS, those of us with more exotic taste (and a liking for sandals) will look elsewhere.
quote:
The forthcoming server version OTOH is a different kettle of fish, with all the new .NET stuff in it..
True - I'll give you that one
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff