Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Computer !@#$%^&* Crash!

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » *Computer !@#$%^& Crash! (Page 1)**

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Computer !@#$%^&* Crash!

Ian Price
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1714
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-07-2001 05:21 PM

I have a Compaq Presario 1200 notebook. I am running Win98, IE5.5 and all that. This morning, it wouln't boot. After it said "loading win98" it said that it couldn't continue because it was missing the win.com file. Then it gave me the C:\ prompt. Nothing worked, not even the boot disk. Finally I got it to load Windows 98 off of a CD rom we bought for our box office computers. The Compaq doesn't come with a CD. My data remained, thank God, but I wonder what happended?

Does anybody have a clue about what might of happend, besides Windows Sucks and Bill Gates is a loser?

Is there something I could have done to prevent this? Or is it just one of those Windows things? It is kind of like having your wallet stolen.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 02-07-2001 08:42 PM

Hi, Ian

Check to see if there is a WIN98 directory in that machine. If there is, it might be a complete setup tailored for your machine. See if there is a setup.exe in it.

If there is, go for it if you have to go through this crap again. If you do, it'll probably ask you for an OEM number. I don't have an OEM number for a Windows 98 OEM disk. I only have one for Windows 95, and I don't think it will work for a Winblows 98. Maybe some Chiphead on the forum might have a number that you can use.

Strange - Two days ago at the radio station, some dilbrain downloaded a nasty file that had a nasty virus. It took out the MBR, and formatted the drive to some off-the-wall spec. It took 6 hours to get the computer up and running again. It was a Compoop Presario 2200 Desktop.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-07-2001 09:36 PM

I wish I could help ya there, Ian. I know all too well what a major pain that is. If you must start over, try Windows 2000 Professional and stay away from Windows 98.

(I can't wait until Scott Norwood chimes in on this thread! hehe

)

| IP: Logged

Cory Johnson
Film Handler

Posts: 46
From: La Crosse, WI USA
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 02-07-2001 10:33 PM

Well, easy answer is to buy a Mac. But since that is out of the question, heres what you should try.
1) Do a scandisk on the harddrive. Just type scandisk at the command prompt. See what it discovers. I maybe that the HD is on the fritz.
2) You can run setup again, as described by Paul. You wont lose any of your settings, but be warned, I highly doubt that it will run very well if this gets it back to running.
3) Do a full check on your hard disk - all sectors. Make sure there is no bad sectors on the disk.
4) If you have access to all of your data, back it up (Zip it and move it via network or something). Reinstall windoze.
Once something like this happens, its always down hill until you start from scratch again with windows.

If all of those fail, bite the bullet, and buy a PowerBook G4 with Mac OS X=-).

| IP: Logged

Jerry Chase
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1068
From: Margate, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 02-07-2001 10:48 PM

I hate Compaq and it is the one brand of computer I refuse to support my program on. Cameo (over the hills from you) bought a Compaq Presario and the thing was replaced twice and was still flakey. It eventually was replaced with another brand and all the problems stopped.

That said, win.com is only about a 25 k bootstrap. Chances are good that the windows or the fat and disk controller stubbed a toe and corrupted or lost the file. The recommendation to use scandisk, defrag, and reload from scratch are right on. If your HD is going, it'll have some other error soon. If you haven't backed data up to another disk, do it now.

FWIW, W2K won't solve HD controller problems.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-07-2001 10:49 PM

[insert bunch of stuff here...backups are important...laptops suck...get a real operating system...blah...blah...blah...]

Bottom line: if your laptop will run NT4 or Win2k, then I'd highly recommend switching to either of these. Unfortunately, lots of laptop hardware is custom-made and requires flaky third-party drivers and such, so this may not be an option if your hardware isn't supported by Win2k.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 02-07-2001 10:53 PM

Jerry, is the win.com file a general "fit all" for Winblows 98? Or, is it a file that is tailored to the specific machine configuration itself?

Scott, how true....

| IP: Logged

Ian Price
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1714
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-07-2001 11:33 PM

It works for now. I just re-loaded the operating system. Yea, I'd love a Mac, make mine a G4 notebook, with the 500 Mhz chip and an outboard CD RAM burner.

Scott,

Can I run my mission critical DOS software on a machine running Win2000? Our box office software is DOS based.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 02-08-2001 12:21 AM

Be warned before you upgrade to Windows 2000 that it is a full 32-Bit operating system. In Microsoft land that basically means you'll be out of luck when you try to run DOS programs. That's one of the things that makes Win2000 much better. Also know that Windows 2000 is basically Windows NT 5.0. In fact, when you have an ASP request for all of the server values on Windows 2000 the OS version number it returns is Windows NT 5.0! I guess they changed the name at the last minute. I will tell you that Windows NT 4.0 sucks ass, and Windows 2000 is much better.

However, Mac OS X is much better (even Mac OS 9.1 is better). Windows still uses CISC processors which only process a fraction of what a RISC chip (used in Macs) will do in the same clock cycle. That's why you really shouldn't place too much importance on MHZ ratings of processors. It's how fast that the data is processed that really matters. If you get a G4 Powerbook don't forget to buy me one as well! I'll pay shipping!

[ 03-30-2003, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: Joe Redifer ]

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2001 06:00 AM

"Some" DOS software will run under NT4/Win2k, but not anything that tries to talk to hardware directly (such as most games). The NT kernel is not DOS; all DOS software runs on a "virtual DOS machine" emulated in software, which is why some of it doesn't work.

You can always dual-boot between DOS and NT/2k, however. It's not ideal, but it works.

I thought NT4 was pretty decent, actually. It's a bigger improvement over NT 3.5.1 than Win2k is over NT4. On the other hand, NT4 was a real dog on most laptops (the IBM laptops ran it pretty well, though), and Win2k has many improvements with respect to hardware support, etc. If you don't need the hardware support, though, there's not much advantage to Win2k over NT4.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2001 08:56 AM

Install Bootmagic and a copy of real dos (pcdos) on a seperate partition.
I have found dos apps such as the R2 are far more stable this way than running under the windos

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 02-08-2001 08:58 AM

I went from Win2K to Win NT 4 and the difference was night and day. NT 4 was very slow, didn't have some of the cool features that I liked in Win2K and was ugly (I know that doesn't matter to you, Scott, since you use command line as often as you can). I don't think either are ideal for a network server, however.

| IP: Logged

Jerry Chase
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1068
From: Margate, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 02-08-2001 08:58 AM

Paul- win.com is generic. IIRC, the boot sequence for Win 95/98 is
bios
config.sys
autoexec.bat
msdos.sys (actually a hidden form of batch file in 95-98)
io.sys
win.com
various parts too numerous to mention

Windows ME tries to clean out most of this.

I've not tried running my DOS based ticketing software on Win 2000. NT was just too obtuse, and I've not bothered with 2000 because it is much simpler (and faster) to support software when it runs on a single operating system. I've still got some 3.11 and DOS users out there.

While my ticketing software doesn't make any low level interrupt calls, it does take advantage of an undocumented difference between the DOS file system and Windows GUI file systems. I'm not sure how 2000 would handle that when giving access permissions.

FWIW, I had an original version of 95 that has been running without reloading since two months after it first came on the market. A lot of the Windows problems occur because of software developers not understanding how to work with Windows without trashing some part of it. If you load few programs, and resist the urge to try out cutting edge stuff, Windows can run fine for years.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-08-2001 02:03 PM

I have a OS2 server that has not been powered down or rebooted in 2 years rock stable

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 02-08-2001 06:43 PM

At United Artists we used OS2 to hook the network up when we did our Proteus/Satellite Theater Network b.s. It handled things like registering votes from wireless keypads that were in the hands of each audience member and displaying the reults on a 46 foot screen. It worked well, but wouldn't be anything I would want to use at home.

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.