upgrade..XP or WIN 2000 ???

Hi,

I would go for Win 2000.
XP is the bigest pile of shite second to ME.
I've been using an XP system for the past month at work and it keeps crashing and giving me problems. It just doesn't like Video Editing. I understand that it is probably the pc I am using too.......But my home pc which run both Win 98 and 2000 is old than my work and works a treat.

XP looks and feels cartoonish.

I would suggest that you run both win 98 & 2000 on your system.

Use Win 98 for playing on the internet etc and use Win 2000 just for editing with an extra large drive (Formatted to NTFS)

That's how I do it.

Works a treat......email me if you have any other questions.

Tilski

Hi Tilski,

quote:Originally posted by tilski:
XP is the bigest pile of shite second to ME. I've been using an XP system for the past month at work and it keeps crashing and giving me problems. It just doesn't like Video Editing.

I suspect that this might be due to a driver conflict or some system configuration issue on your PC. We find XP to be very stable and excellent for video editing. Not all hardware has suitable drivers for XP though, so you should check this before you consider upgrading.

Best regards,

------------------

Andy Dean, Pure Motion Ltd, www.puremotion.com

Hi Simon,

Win XP is a very similar animal underneath to Win2000 but with some extra functionality and a fisher price GUI (Graphical user interface).

By the way you can change the GUI to look like good ol Win98/Win200 by selecting classic environment, if you don't like the my first computer look.

We have a dual boot (Win2000/XP) Duron 1Ghz with 256mb RAM, used for all sorts including video editing, both as stable as each other.

The only thing is XP seems a little more memory hungry, speed is very similar.

rgds

GG

Windows 2000 Professional - no competition!

I've used my DV500 with Win XP for about 4 months and it works excellently.
I can capture as big a file as my hard disk will take and the version 4 DV500 drivers works well.

I feel it is the best version of windows I've used- far better than win98/me.

I tried out Win2000 but couldn't get it to run well- not that I'm blaming win2000, although it's the only version of win that I've struggled with.

But as for winxp being no competition to win2000 for video editing using a DV500 with Premiere- that is rather a silly comment I feel. It needs qualifying.

Win xp runs everything on my pc well enough- that's for sure.

Good luck Billy

The track record for ALL Windows Operating Systems, and I've been building computers since Windows For Workgroups 3.11 is that they mature about 18 months to 2 years after release. We have nine computers which are currently being moved over from W98II and NT4 to W2K.

I've no doubt that XP will come of age in due course but, until then, I agree 100% with Bob Crabtree and the CV Review - don't go near it!

As for my comment being silly, maybe you should revisit your profile and, for the record I don't have to qualify ANY of my statements to you or anyone else!

I have a dual boot system, 98SE--XP Pro, and I have to say I find XP an extremely solid base for video editing.

Never having tried 2000 I can`t compare, however I do believe if you get all the relevent drivers for your hardware/software no problems should be encountered.

I forgot to mention if it matters, that I am using both Adobe Premiere 6 and Media Studio Pro 6, with a pinnacle DV studio firewire card.

quote:Originally posted by mhP:
I've no doubt that XP will come of age in due course but, until then, I agree 100% with Bob Crabtree and the CV Review - don't go near it!

I don't ever remember writing that! In fact, CV gave it 95%. Did you read the same review?

Put simply, Windows XP is better than Windows 2000 (but only just). It has a revised/enhanced NT Kernel, memory management, and a boat load of other features that make it intuitive, flexible and more powerful.

If it doesn't work for you, then you've either flaky hardware, configured it wrong, or not very well maintained. Obviously as mentioned in the review, if your hardware isn't supported then don't bother, but the same applies to Win2k as said in the 3 part tutorial.

XP is excellent (cartoon like or not), if any of you are having trouble with it, then I am more than glad to help you/give advice to have it running properly.

And for the record, you don't need to qualify any of you statements at all, but it makes it a hell of a lot better for people without your experience to understand the choices ahead of them. It's like someone screaming at me 'Vote Labour!", and me turning around and and going 'Oh? Ok!'. Not likely.

Tim

I agree with the post above. Simply put XP (in my case pro) is brilliant. Win 98 seriously shows its age when compared. I have it installed on both my Main Pc and Laptop. Rarely do I get a program crash, and I have never had a system crash since I installed it.

Ed

i agree that windows XP is much better that win 98 and windows ME.

I have couple of computers with various operating systems 95,98,me and recently XP and found them all very unstable except Xp.

I agree the GUI is a bit gimicky but other than that it is great.

i am currently waiting for dv storm to have windows xp drivers and then will install in due course.

RAj

I am not too far from you, Give us a call and see W2000 fly (dual 866 processor and audigy). John

I don`t understand why people think XP is (cartoonish) in it`s appearance. I find this new look fresh, and makes any software I load, easier to veiw.
Possibly it`s the old thing of, people don`t like change.

Mac OSX

Now there's a GUI!

Tim

quote:Originally posted by tim.callaghan:
I don't ever remember writing that! In fact, CV gave it 95%. Did you read the same review?

I do recall XP getting a high % but I also recall, around the time of the in-depth feature on W2k, the phrase, ".....however we cannot at this stage recommend XP as a platform for serious video editing..." or words to that effect.

January 2002 : page 32
'This is an operating system very well suited to video editing'

Just in case this point has not been sufficiently clearly made - mhP's take on my view of XP and of CV's review of XP is COMPLETELY wrong.

When reviewed, XP scored 95% and got an Editor's Choice award - and getting that award does meant that *I* am endorsing the reviewer's belief that the product is very good.

The important thing about XP, and this is the same for EVERY OS upgrade undertaken (Mac, Windows, whatever), is to check before buying the OS whether or not it will run your critical software and hardware.

I don't say that to cover my back but because there can be significant problems.

As an example, you can see from the url below that quite a few people cannot get their camcorders to work under XP when the same camcorders worked just fine in earlier versions of Windows:
http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum10/HTML/005935.html

I disagree strongly with the inference that a couple of other people have made that the interface for XP is anything other than professional.

Yes, it is different from earlier versions but I do believe that the changes to the interface make the OS a lot easier to use than earlier versions of Windows.

Actually, this isn't simply a belief, it's a fact, and one that I have seen clearly for my self after installing XP on machines of non-technical friends.

They tend to be a LOT more comfortable with XP than they ever were with 98.

The new interface also give access to a lot of features of Windows that were available in earlier versions but hidden from users who view computers simply as tools and are not likely to fiddle around in an OS to see what useful stuff is lurking below the surface.

For the record:

My office PC, which is mainly used for office chores, runs Win2K - largley because I do not want to make life hard for our tech support people.

My main home machine (on which, stupidly, I regularly test video editing hardware and software) runs XP Home.

My wife's PC runs XP Pro (and it uses Pro not Home because I found a source of XP Pro cheaper than anyone is selling XP Home)

My youngest son's PC dual boots between 98SE and XP Pro (but he largely uses 98, cos his main use of it is games)

I have three other test PCs set up at home - one dual-boots between XP Pro and 98SE (usually, it is running XP); one runs 98SE only; one runs XP Pro only.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

I've no doubt that XP will come of age in due course but, until then, I agree 100% with Bob Crabtree and the CV Review - don't go near it!

[This message has been edited by bcrabtree (edited 12 June 2002).]

I would recommend W2K. Win XP had the potential to be much better than W2K, unfortunately MS lumbered it with a lot of mediocre middleware which is very hard to remove or disable and a mickey mouse GUI.

For those who haven’t used a computer before the basic GUI of XP is wonderful for them; also for those that don’t have any decent utilities the middleware gets them through. I have built a number of PCs for people with WinXP and all of them use the classic desktop; it may not be as pretty but it allows them to be more productive (most of them have also killed off the office assistant so they can be considered fairly intelligent!). I suppose it depends on the users mentality, due you expect to use a computer without having to think or do you treat it like driving, learning how to do it to start with and still use your brain to observe and anticipate every time you use it.

Bob – where do you get you cheap XP Pros? Normally I can legally get an educational copy of XP for the PCs I build (the licence terms mean about 66% of UK households are eligible!) but standalone retail versions aren’t cheap.

I'm not going to be drawn into a systems war, just make a few statements.

I used 98 (1st ed) until last year for DV video editing. The machine eventually became unstable and is now in a poor state.

Last December I bought a new P4 from Dell with XP Home installed. I now edit DV on that machine without problems. It has not yet crashed at all, ever. No software has ever crashed on it either. I run Cinestream, Paint Shop Pro, and some basic MS stuff on it, and I never let it get near the phone line so it's nevfer going to get updated unless I tell it to.

2000 may well be better/more stable etc, but XP is working perfectly for me. Now.

Now here's a new slant to this thread.

Anyone got nero burning rom working right on xp?

This question was asked of me only about a week ago.
As I had not, at that point used nero and xp together I got curious?

My system is Athlon 1333 266fsb abit kt7 board 512k ram. It is configured with my system hard drive in a ata100 drive bay so I can easily swap out system disks and therefore op systems. On ide channel 2 I run a plextor 24 speed toaster. My cd reader is scsi. I have a second hard drive also in a drive bay and hooked up to a promise ata100 controller card. I have two system disks, one runs win98se the other runs xp. Until a week ago if I wanted to do any cd toasting I used the win98se setup and nero.
I unfortunately decided to find out if there was any basis in the reported problems re xp and nero, so installed nero 5.5 on to my xp system drive.
My first attempt at copying a cd consisted of creating an image on the second hard drive which was hooked to the promise card and then burning, rather than "on the fly" disk to disk. The software (nero) created the image, burnt the disk (which copied fine) and then reported ERROR! cannot write to disk F: system is shutting down! etc etc. I presume this was at the point where nero was trying to erase the image created.
The machine locked solid and a reset was the only recourse. on rebooting the power supply kept tripping out during the boot process. Replacing the power supply was my only solution. Now, once more able to reboot, my promise card refused to recognise the drive hooked to it. I hooked this drive eventually to one of the onboard ide ports, still no joy, this 20 gig Maxtor drive was "an ex parrot" in python terms. I suspected a spike, who wouldn't with the power supply and drive breathing their last at the same time? So now back running with a 36 gig Maxtor hooked to the promise card. Same cd burning scenario with an image created firstly on the promise controlled drive. Exactly the same result and error messages! This time the power supply survived but the drive displays stiff parrot like features!
Being one, a fool, two, a moron, three, inquisitive and four someone who would not, could not believe the evidence presented to him I proceeded to hook up a third drive to the promise card, this time a pretty spanking new 30 gig Fujitsu. Same scenario, guess what? Yes, now the proud owner of a third expired parrot.
I am in tears and at a loss to explain.
Could it be Nero? But that worked fine under '98. Could it be the Promise card? But that worked fine under '98 Could it be xp? Well that didn't work too well running under '98. So what should I suspect as the assassin? Your thoughts please and what recourse do I have, if any, regarding my three dead disks? They are all still under manufacturers warranty but it seems unfair to blame them when this clearly is not their fault. My machine is now back burning fine under '98 and I'm certainly not going to be the one to test further? So, like the original question asked. Anyone got Nero running properly under xp?
Xp and Nero? Beware!
Regards sobbingly
Ken

I have Nero 5.5 and it works a treat with XP Pro, can`t offer any explaination for your problems other than to say Nero and XP work fine together.

So Bob, are you denying making the statement ".....however we cannot at this stage recommend XP as a platform for serious video editing..." or words to that effect.

Just how arrogant are you?

Can't you ever admit that you are wrong?

Of course the Win2K series had caveats about XP - it was written soon after XP was launched and before we had had any chance to give a proper verdict.

But what I was commenting about - and there can be no doubt this was the case - was your completely false statement about my views on XP and about our review of XP.

You are entitled to give an opinion, even if it's wrong.

But what is not reasonable is for you to get your facts so wrong, by misquoting me, or CV or anyone else.

I suppose it was too much for me to expect you to make a simple apology for your error.

And I suppose it's also too much for me to expect you to make one now - rather than to just keep on digging down into the hole you are in.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by mhP:
So Bob, are you denying making the statement ".....however we cannot at this stage recommend XP as a platform for serious video editing..." or words to that effect.

Sorry to hear about your problems.

I too have Nero 5.5 running on the dual boot system I mentioned earlier in this thread. Work fine under Win2K and XP.

The only suggestion I could make is WinXP aleady has built in CD burning software, perhaps it is in some way conflicting with Nero.

GG

KenW,

I don't know for sure, but I really do NOT think that Nero could be to blame for your hardware problems.

However, I have read various statement on CIX from long-term users of Nero that recent updates to V5 seem to be adding new bugs while removing older ones.

A number of people are saying that they are unhappy with V5.5.5.8 and are going back to the previous version - though they are not saying this specifically in relation to XP.

But, again, I struggle to see how a bit of software such as Nero could cause the sorts of problems you are having.

My view is that the Promise card is the most likely culprit.

Have you actually tried connecting any of the dead drives directly to the motherboard (in this or any other PC) to see if they really are dead?

If you have (and they are indeed dead), then I think I'd assume pull out the Promise card a bit smartish.

And, of course, it could be that there was a power spike which damaged the Promise and/or (I'm sorry to say) some part of the motherboard.

In situations like this, it is perfectly possible to end up having to replace the motherboard.

Bob C

Bob C

re: nero burning rom and xp

all our techs here use nero because we have a site licence.
they are dual booting xp and 98se because nero causes nothing but problems on our machines under xp , so they boot to 98se to write discs.

Hi Ken,

quote:Originally posted by Ken W:
So, like the original question asked. Anyone got Nero running properly under xp?
Xp and Nero? Beware!

Wow, tough story To answer your question first; I use Nero 5.5.8.2 under XP Home and it works a treat - no problems.

I did however have a similar motherboard to yourself (maybe the same one): Abit KT7 RAID. I had no end of trouble with this. I wasted days and days trying to get this stable, it would just randomly lock up. I thought I'd solved it by changing the sound card, but I recently had to reinstall Windows and it started locking up again (no changes to the hardware). Well, that was enough and I've changed it for an Intel based motherboard and it's been fine so far (1 month of use). We've had two of these KT7 boards - one randomly locked up and one had no end of problems with its USB ports. I wouldn't recommend these to anyone.

Best regards,

------------------

Andy Dean, Pure Motion Ltd, www.puremotion.com

blimey....do you wish sometimes you'd just kept quiet ?

quote:Originally posted by inhouse:
blimey....do you wish sometimes you'd just kept quiet ?

No. Just sit back and watch the fireworks.

I think the message coming out of this thread to your original question is that both operating systems are very good and stable for video purposes.

I use W2K pro and have no desire to change whatsoever. They both work well, so go with your instict.

SIFI

Nero only officially supports XP after release 5.5.5.1 The latest version (5.5.8.2) Burns CD's quite happily on this Windows XP Professional system, and I'm happy to say I haven't made a coaster yet!

Read the version history for bug fixes at: http://www.nero.com/en/content/c1002822806430.html#c1002822806430

Trev

thanks for the replies and condolences fellas.
To Bob c
Yes Bob, I did try hooking the fried drives directly off the onboard ide channels, I think I mentioned this in my post? No joy, they refuse to be identified by the onboard bios.
Every other drive I stuff into my drive bays (2) is picked up immediately by the bios, either onboard ide or promise card.

The motherboard is behaving perfectly as it was before I started playing with Nero.
I tend to lean towards your conclusion Bob and suspect the Promise card. But it behaved perfectly in read/write programme running activities before my disasters and is behaving flawlessly in this regard now??
It was an interesting post about Nero only being suitable for xp after version 5.5.something, something. Maybe my version pre-dates this? I will check. Either way surely software shouldn't fry my f******g hard drives.

I originally said " xp and Nero, Beware!

Perhaps I should have said xp, Nero pre versions, KT7 motherboards and Promise controllers, Beware!
Ken

So, Bob you don't deny making the statement ".....however we cannot at this stage recommend XP as a platform for serious video editing..." or words to that effect, caveat or not. Therefore my agreement with you on making the statement was correct, I am vindicated and once again it is you that owes me the apology; but no doubt you will attack me yet again as is your demeanor.

Mike,

You took the quote about XP out of context. Thay said that statement before they had even used it. With that in mind they would have been incredibly irresponsible to recommend it.

The way you said it was as an argument against XP once it had been evaluated and that is not a fair argument to make.

In my opinion Bob does not even come close to owing you an apology.

I honestly think you should have been a politicians spin doctor.

SIFI

let's assume that mike is right and bob did make the statement.

can we please have an exact quote , not the choice section , and source info i.e mag issue no and page.

if he can't then can we please do something about the constant carping from mike against bob and prepare for the posting from eddie edwardes saying that mike is a misunderstood person.

this webboard is getting to the stage where it is personal attack without provocation, rather than personal help.
i wonder if that is why there are over 6000 members , but , not many different posters.

quote:Originally posted by mhP:
I've no doubt that XP will come of age in due course but, until then, I agree 100% with Bob Crabtree and the CV Review - don't go near it!

Look,

I wrote both of the articles in question, so I think I stand in good ground to make comments.

Your original statement was that you agree with Bob and the CV review, but the statement by Bob and myself was written before, and published at the same time as XP's realease in the upgrading to Win2k articles, so what review are you agreed with?

At this stage maybe you could accuse me of being a little pedantic, possibly. But you are on about a completely different quote, written 3 months before XP's official review in CV. And, at that point in time, we thought XP was a bit of question mark as it was completely brand new, so did not recommend it. 3 months later (or so), in the official CV review of XP in regards to video editing, and plenty of times getting to grips with it, we thoroughly recommend it.

The only thing that Bob is wrong about is that the upgrade tutorial was written well before XP was launched, and as said before, at the time of writing, we couldn't recommend it.

Yes, we did make the statement, but it was before XP was released. The review then put our faith into XP, which you said the review didn't.

Therefore if we really want to get really silly, you are wrong, and no apologies are neccessary, bar your extraordinary persistence to get Bob to apologise for a quote that was made before a product was released.

Please stop, it's not very helpful, or interesting.

Tim

Indeed, in the actual *review* of XP January 2002 it received an Editors Choice award. Bob's the Editor, so that says it all.

As to the arguments regarding maturity of XP and driver compatability, even Pinnacle have managed to release XP drivers for it's Pro one card, I'd be surprised if anyone takes longer than them!

Any new hardware must surely now have XP drivers or be XP compatible, because most new PC's come with XP.
If you have old hardware and access to the Web, it's not too difficult to find out what has XP drivers and what doesn't. Many devices have support built into XP itself

FWIW, I have an AIC7850 single chip SCSI adapter that isn't compatible, along with a Black Widow 4800SP scanner that also isn't compatible. Fortunately they are now fitted in an older PC that's running 98SE and connected to my home network.

IMO XP is here, it's reliable, and I like its usability. I connect my Sony DSC-P1 stills camera, and it asks me where I want to transfer the images and what I want to name them. I run Premiere 6.02 and After effects 5.0 with minimal fuss. It locks up occasionally in games, but it did that before under W2k, at least now it detects there is a looping problem and tells me about it! (BTW this is down to a geforce 256DDR and unsigned Nvidia drivers!) My only concern as a video editor would be camera compatibility.

I feel that XP is more than serious competition for W2k. Once you get used to its different look and feel, I think it grows on you. And remember whichever of the two operating systems you choose, you will still need to download drivers and patches, for chipsets, graphics cards, Premiere 6.01 or 6.02 and other hardware.

Trev

For the benefit of the man who continues (as expected) to keep on digging, some facts, with dates, and the most relevant quotes from the mag:

Microsoft launched Windows XP on October 25.

The document that Tim submitted as the first part of his three-part tutorial was dated July 9 and published in our September issue that went on sale the last week of August. I finished editing this part sometime during the first week of August.

Part one was the part that contained the caveat about XP. According to one of the near-final edited versions I have here at home, it went something like this:
==============
Once it has been released, of course, XP will have its own teething troubles, just as Win2K did. It has taken Win2K about a year to settle down and prove itself, so we'd probably advise readers to leave XP on the shelf until any serious problems are ironed out by masochistic such as us, and until the final reviews are in.
=================
Note, please the very last clause of the paragraph.

The document that Tim submitted as the third part of his three part tutorial was dated September 30 and published in our November issue that went on sale the last week of October.

I finished editing that article during the first week of October so I was wrong to say in my posting of June 13 that the series was written soon after XP was launched - I should have said that the final part was published soon after XP was launched.

It was the December issue (on sale last week of November) that contained our news story about Win XP being launched on time on October 25).

This news story had the following caveats about buying XP (according to the version I have here):

===========
WinXP news story

What XP doesn’t do, though, is have any native support for video editing cards that don’t conform to the OHCI-standard – not that any operating system does. And, at the time of writing (November 2), none of the big-three editing card makers – Pinnacle, Matrox and Canopus - had available for download XP drivers for any non-OHCI cards.

This situation has already caught out a number of readers (see Help and Letters, pxx) who’ve blindly upgraded to XP without realising that no suitable drivers are yet available. As a result, their cards have stopped running, or [are] not run properly.

In truth, no upgrade should be undertaken lightly, and none should ever be carried out without trying hard to assess the difficulties that may be caused by hardware or software that won’t run under a different operating system.

With that in mind, readers considering a move to XP should closely read our Upgrading to Windows 2000 tutorial, which appeared in three parts between September and November 2001. Most of the tips and advice given in this series – including when NOT to upgrade - apply equally well to XP.

We’d also recommend taking advantage of Computer Video’s free on-line message board to ask outstanding question BEFORE carrying out an upgrade, rather than after.
========================

The review of XP was published in our January 2002 issue (on sale, I think, the first week of January). The document that Tim submitted as the review is dated 18 November. I finished editing it, I think, during the first week of December.

Below is the scoring and the conclusion from the review (the conclusion may be a couple of words different from what was published, but that's all, I think.
===============
[CV RATINGS]
Features 4
Performance 5
Ease of use 5
Value for money 5

Overall Rating 95%

Conclusion

Windows XP Home Edition represents a huge change for home operating systems - in terms of ease of use, functionality and reliability - it's an industrial-strength product that can be relied on to do the job that it is supposed to do. There will be times where problems will arise but, in our experience, these will be few and far between.

This is an operating system that is very well suited to video editing. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Windows editors should immediately rush out and buy it. And, certainly, would-be editors shouldn't buy it just for the free bundled editor, Movie Maker.

We haven't found any significant problems with editing software that runs on OHCI-compatible FireWire cards or ports.

However, one problem area is dedicated video editing hardware, since this relies on the maker to produce XP drivers and most haven't yet done so, and not all of them will do so for all their cards. So don't upgrade blindly. Use the compatibility checker to find out if it's okay to do so, and double-check by visiting the hardware maker's own site.

If buying a new computer, XP's what will be on it and, assuming you don't want to add any older hardware for which drivers haven't yet been written, we'd anticipate no problems.

If currently using a Win9x-based PC, and all the hardware and applications check out as being okay, we can confidently recommend an upgrade - though we'd strongly suggest following all the guidelines we provided in our Upgrading to Windows 2000 tutorial in the September-November 2001 issues.

If there are incompatibilities, XP makes it relatively simple to run a dual-boot system where an earlier version of Windows is retained to run older hardware.

Users who have already moved over to Windows 2000 will not be able to upgrade to Home Edition, so have little choice but to go the Pro route if there are features in XP they find compelling.

And Pro is also the only upgrade option for users wishing to use dual-processors for faster editing or who want to do hard disk raiding in software.

The scores we've given to XP Home Edition are based on its being used at the heart of an editing PC.

Had we been scoring it as a general home operating system, we'd likely have given it 100 per cent - it's really that good. This is the future and it looks rosy, but very green and blue, too!
====================

Since the review has been published, the only substantial issue concerning XP and video editors that I am aware of is that of XP's incompatibility with certain DV camcorders - something that has been EXTREMELY well documented in these forums.

So, as I said, and as everyone else who's comment - apart from mhP - sees it, mhP was wrong in the original comments that he made and to which I and others responded.

I'll leave this thread open for a bit longer but, intend to close it soon.

There isn't, I feel sure, any point waiting around for an apology from someone who has dug himself so far underground that he's never going to see the light - presuming, of course, he even has eyes to see.

Bob C

It was after reading the review of windows xp in January that I decided to upgrade to xp home.I find it a very good and easy to use operating system for all my video editing.I'm not a Bof.it's just a hobby.
Ray Maher.

Hi

I heard that you have to re-register XP every time you change your hardware, add or swap a hard disk.

It seems that MS have adopted a big brother type of stance if this is the case.

If this is true, then I'm sticking with Win2K Pro.

Jim Bird.

Jim,

No you can change stuff in the PC and not have to re-register, but I had thought it was rather more stuff than an experience I had yesterday suggests.

My son's PC couldn't access the internet via the network, though it could see (and be seen by) all the other PCs on the local network.

After about an hour's fiddling, I changed the network card in my son's PC.

This was, I think, only the third component I had changed on it since XP was registered.

I had changed the CD-ROM drive (the other one was destroyed by a CD that shattered into about 50 pieces while a game was being played), and the processor - upgrading from a Duron 650 to a Duron 1000, cos I couldn't resist buying one they'd become so cheap, and the lad was due a little reward for some good exam results.

When the PC booted up after I'd changed the network card, XP wouldn't boot up fully, instead that XP need to be registered.

Unlike registering the first time, which was trivial (I did it over the net and it was fully automatic), this time I had no internet connection, so I had to run a telephone extension cable into my son's room and do the registration over the phone on a free-phone number.

Took about six or seven minutes, so it wasn't a disaster.

Trouble is, I couldn't get the replacment network card to be properly recognised by Win 98SE (my son's PC dual boots), though XP was fine.

So, I put the old one back in again, but though the card was recognised by both OS, the PC still couldn't get on the internet, even though it was seen by (and could see) all the other PCs on the local network. In other words, I was back to square one.

Finally, after about five hours mucking, I realised that NONE of the PCs on the local network could access the internet except for the one that has the direct internet connection.

I rebooted that PC and the problem went away on my son's PC and on all the others, too - which probably would have been the case if I had done that before starting to mess around with my son's PC.

I hate computers.

Bob C

The dreaded ICS!

I got so fed up with ICS screwing up internet access I got a router/switch. Now I can access the net from all the PCs on my network without having to start up the main one!

As I neede a 100MB switch the extra cost was only about £15

One of the problems of Win XP is that the firewall and ICS were writtain by different people, unfortunatly they apparently did not test them together until the beta realease and there are several known issues which may be fixed in service pack 1!

quote:Originally posted by Gary MacKenzie:
and prepare for the posting from eddie edwardes saying that mike is a misunderstood person.

this webboard is getting to the stage where it is personal attack without provocation, rather than personal help.
i wonder if that is why there are over 6000 members , but , not many different posters.

1. Mike is big enough and ugly enough to fight his own battles.

2. I know the history and rest assurred it's certainly NOT without provocation.

3. Maybe there are over 6000 posters because, unlike Mike, they are too scared to stand up for what they see as being right, fair and honest. But aren't you the peron who calls himself a tomb?

quote:Originally posted by Eddie Edwardes:
1. Mike is big enough and ugly enough to fight his own battles.

2. I know the history and rest assurred it's certainly NOT without provocation.

3. Maybe there are over 6000 posters because, unlike Mike, they are too scared to stand up for what they see as being right, fair and honest. But aren't you the peron who calls himself a tomb?

1. glad i didn't call him ugly , he'll get upset at you.

2. provocation is the other way round at the moment , he started the slagging off.
maybe he wants thrown off the webboard again.

3.if you check the thread where we all said who we were you would see it was the title of my favourite book at the time , mis-spelt.
you just named yourself after a poor skiier.
at least i put my hands up if someone proves me wrong , as i've said before we all make mistakes .......... just some won't accept that they might be wrong.

quote:Originally posted by Eddie Edwardes:
Maybe there are over 6000 posters because, unlike Mike, they are too scared to stand up for what they see as being right, fair and honest.

Many of us have had run ins with Bob in the past. I have had quite a few myself and the upshot has been me apologising to Bob and Bob apologising to me for various disagreements. When one of us accepted we were wrong we stood up and admitted it.

In this situation Mike is blatantly wrong but instead of holding his hands up he's digging even further.

Open your eyes

SIFI

PS Gary, you were pretty close to the mark with your prediction

Two trace-routes - one for mHp, the other for Eddie Edwards

Are these one and the same person, or is it two people using the same computer?

Bob C
===================

McAfee Visual Trace Version 3.25 Results
Target: 62.64.237.217
Date: 17/06/2002 (Monday), 01:27:43
Nodes: 19

Node Data
Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name
2 1 - 217.35.199.203 Unknown
3 1 - 217.35.199.162 Unknown
4 1 - 217.35.199.238 Unknown
5 2 1 62.7.251.1 Unknown inh2cs01-602.imsnet2.btopenworld.com
6 3 - 213.120.62.149 Unknown
7 4 - 62.6.206.97 Unknown
8 4 2 62.6.197.137 Aylesbury Vale core2-pos4-2.bletchley.ukcore.bt.net
9 4 2 194.74.65.225 Ealing core2-pos5-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net
10 4 2 194.74.65.121 Sutton core2-pos7-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net
11 5 3 195.66.225.32 Greenwich fe0-0.linx1.nacamar.net.uk
12 6 4 213.200.77.34 Unknown tiscali-uk-1.ip.tiscali.net
13 7 - 212.74.111.245 Unknown pos3-0.lon11.as9105.net
14 7 - 212.74.111.237 Unknown ge1-1.lon10.as9105.net
15 8 - 212.74.108.9 Unknown pos2-0.mk0.as9105.net
16 7 - 212.74.111.221 Unknown ge3-2.switch0-mk.as9105.net
17 9 - 212.74.112.35 Unknown bt1.switch0-mk.as9105.net
18 10 - 192.168.255.4 Unknown
19 11 5 62.64.237.217 Southwark dial-62-64-237-217.access.uk.tiscali.com

Registrant id#: 5
Registrant:
Tiscali SpA (TISCALI-DOM)
Piazza del Carmine, 22
Cagliari, 09124
IT
============
McAfee Visual Trace Version 3.25 Results
Target: 62.64.238.16
Date: 17/06/2002 (Monday), 01:35:08
Nodes: 17

Node Data
Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name
2 1 - 217.35.199.203 Unknown
3 1 - 217.35.199.162 Unknown
4 1 - 217.35.199.238 Unknown
5 2 1 62.7.251.1 Unknown inh2cs01-602.imsnet2.btopenworld.com
6 3 - 213.120.62.146 Unknown
7 4 - 213.120.207.221 Unknown
8 4 2 194.72.31.33 Aylesbury Vale core1-pos4-3.bletchley.ukcore.bt.net
9 4 2 195.99.120.213 Newham core1-pos5-3.ilford.ukcore.bt.net
10 4 2 194.74.65.117 Sutton core1-pos8-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net
11 5 3 195.66.224.32 Greenwich fe3-0.lon0.nacamar.net.uk
12 6 4 213.200.77.42 Unknown tiscali-uk-2.ip.tiscali.net
13 7 - 212.74.108.9 Unknown pos2-0.mk0.as9105.net
14 8 - 212.74.111.221 Unknown ge3-2.switch0-mk.as9105.net
15 9 - 212.74.112.35 Unknown bt1.switch0-mk.as9105.net
16 10 - 192.168.255.4 Unknown
17 11 5 62.64.238.16 Southwark dial-62-64-238-16.access.uk.tiscali.com

Network Data

Registrant id#: 5
Registrant:
Tiscali SpA (TISCALI-DOM)
Piazza del Carmine, 22
Cagliari, 09124
IT

Back to the question :- Simon you are quite welcome to pop round to me in Rainham and see how W2000 runs. Home built & very stable.

Back to Skiers
http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum29/HTML/000385-3.html
Topic: Guess the mystery identiity of LOTR.
johnpr98 posted 17 February 2002 09:19

I guessed 2 pseudonyms then
(Chirpy was also on the ball).

John
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 17 June 2002).]

quote:Originally posted by bcrabtree:
Two trace-routes - one for mHp, the other for Eddie Edwards

Are these one and the same person, or is it two people using the same computer?

Bob C
===================

McAfee Visual Trace Version 3.25 Results
Target: 62.64.237.217
Date: 17/06/2002 (Monday), 01:27:43
Nodes: 19

Node Data
Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name
2 1 - 217.35.199.203 Unknown
3 1 - 217.35.199.162 Unknown
4 1 - 217.35.199.238 Unknown
5 2 1 62.7.251.1 Unknown inh2cs01-602.imsnet2.btopenworld.com
6 3 - 213.120.62.149 Unknown
7 4 - 62.6.206.97 Unknown
8 4 2 62.6.197.137 Aylesbury Vale core2-pos4-2.bletchley.ukcore.bt.net
9 4 2 194.74.65.225 Ealing core2-pos5-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net
10 4 2 194.74.65.121 Sutton core2-pos7-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net
11 5 3 195.66.225.32 Greenwich fe0-0.linx1.nacamar.net.uk
12 6 4 213.200.77.34 Unknown tiscali-uk-1.ip.tiscali.net
13 7 - 212.74.111.245 Unknown pos3-0.lon11.as9105.net
14 7 - 212.74.111.237 Unknown ge1-1.lon10.as9105.net
15 8 - 212.74.108.9 Unknown pos2-0.mk0.as9105.net
16 7 - 212.74.111.221 Unknown ge3-2.switch0-mk.as9105.net
17 9 - 212.74.112.35 Unknown bt1.switch0-mk.as9105.net
18 10 - 192.168.255.4 Unknown
19 11 5 62.64.237.217 Southwark dial-62-64-237-217.access.uk.tiscali.com

Registrant id#: 5
Registrant:
Tiscali SpA (TISCALI-DOM)
Piazza del Carmine, 22
Cagliari, 09124
IT
============
McAfee Visual Trace Version 3.25 Results
Target: 62.64.238.16
Date: 17/06/2002 (Monday), 01:35:08
Nodes: 17

Node Data
Node Net Reg IP Address Location Node Name
2 1 - 217.35.199.203 Unknown
3 1 - 217.35.199.162 Unknown
4 1 - 217.35.199.238 Unknown
5 2 1 62.7.251.1 Unknown inh2cs01-602.imsnet2.btopenworld.com
6 3 - 213.120.62.146 Unknown
7 4 - 213.120.207.221 Unknown
8 4 2 194.72.31.33 Aylesbury Vale core1-pos4-3.bletchley.ukcore.bt.net
9 4 2 195.99.120.213 Newham core1-pos5-3.ilford.ukcore.bt.net
10 4 2 194.74.65.117 Sutton core1-pos8-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net
11 5 3 195.66.224.32 Greenwich fe3-0.lon0.nacamar.net.uk
12 6 4 213.200.77.42 Unknown tiscali-uk-2.ip.tiscali.net
13 7 - 212.74.108.9 Unknown pos2-0.mk0.as9105.net
14 8 - 212.74.111.221 Unknown ge3-2.switch0-mk.as9105.net
15 9 - 212.74.112.35 Unknown bt1.switch0-mk.as9105.net
16 10 - 192.168.255.4 Unknown
17 11 5 62.64.238.16 Southwark dial-62-64-238-16.access.uk.tiscali.com

Network Data

Registrant id#: 5
Registrant:
Tiscali SpA (TISCALI-DOM)
Piazza del Carmine, 22
Cagliari, 09124
IT

very interesting since mHp is allegedly running on demons backbone , do a traceroute to www.mikehenson.com and you will see it is a Demon fixed ip. 193.195.37.214

if you use demon you always end up with the same fixed ip number.

in tiscali's case the numbers are allocated as you dial in , the chances of two people getting the same number one after the other is very remote.

If it wasn't for mhP drawing my attention to this thread (from within another thread) I would probably not have bothered:

quote:By mhP:
Dave, it entirely depends with whom I'm in correspondence, I can raise or lower myself dependent upon the circumstances so it's probably best that you don't go anywhere near the W2K v XP thread!

The trouble with telling someone not to go near a certain thing is that it tends to have the opposite effect (take Adam & Eve for example).

Now I see a debate going on as to whether mhP and Eddie Edwardes are one and the same person? Is he, isn't he? There was a much easier way to find out Bob:

If you scroll down this thread to Eddie Edwardes post dated: 17 April 2002 23:33. There, halfway through the third paragraph, he says:

quote:...I just bought the upgrade MSPro 6.5 to see if it was useable, it isn't and if anyone wants it I will happily give it to a worthy case.

Then in this thread, the opening post from mhP informs us that:

quote:We have an unregistered upgrade copy of Ulead MediaStudio Pro 6.5 worth £180 + VAT.
If you know of, or consider yourself to be a "worthy cause" and have a qualifying product to use this product, please contact us by email.

I think Mike Henson - alias nosnehekim, alias Eddie Edwardes, alias mhP - gave himself away - just as he did in the Guess the mystery identiity of LOTR thread highlighted by johnpr98!!! (see the Eddie Edwardes post dated: 11 February 2002 22:47 and my reply to him)

Pity, stick him in the 'Chatter' forum and he can be quite a nice chap:

quote:Previously posted by Chirpy in this thread:
...I must say, your image has certainly changed for the better Mike.

Sorry, I didn't really want to get involved but sometimes it's not easy.

Chirpy.

quote:Originally posted by bcrabtree:
For the benefit of the man who continues (as expected) to keep on digging, some facts, with dates, and the most relevant quotes from the mag:Bob C

When someone answers a simple question, which could be dealt with by a single syllable word, with a tome resembling the first three chapters of War And Peace, I wonder what it is that he's hiding......?

quote:Originally posted by Jim Bird:
I heard that you have to re-register XP every time you change your hardware, add or swap a hard disk.

Exactly when one needs to re-register seems to be a fact known only by Microsoft. But regardless, this is restrictive practice and eloquently debated by Ed Henning in the last issue of PC Magazine who suggests, quite rightly in my opinion, that we should refrain from purchasing XP, DVD's which are region limited and the new audio CD's which will only play in an audio cd player and not a computer cd drive. In addition Microsoft can, if it wished, claim ownership of any attachments transmitted via Hotmail and you may have already read they (were/are?) planning to make Office a "buy-per-use" product!?!

Restrictive practices will only survive if we support them with our cash. Look at how technology has evolved in the last five years; if we accept what's thrown at us what sort of a world are we going to hand over to our children?

With the Governments "Snooping Bill" maybe George Orwell only 10 years adrift?

microsoft have just issued update files that stop the requirement to re-validate xp.

one is also available for office xp.

then again anyone with a corporate version ( dell owners amongst others ) will not have to re-validate , we never needed to validate in the beginning

quote:Originally posted by sepulcre:
provocation is the other way round at the moment , he started the slagging off.
maybe he wants thrown off the webboard again.

You are completely wrong. This whole sorry affair was started by an email to me from Bob Crabtree when I offerred him help around issue 3/4 of the magazine and long before this board existed.

I have monitored this board on and off since its inception.

I posted an advert to sell some surplus equipment in January 2001.

In January 2002 I replied to two postings from people regarding a matter with which I am conversant, my postings, without provocation, were sarcastically attacked.

The full story, complete and unexpurgated, will be posted to this board very soon. Watch this space!

By the way, the skier spells his surname "Edwards"; but I know you have problems with spelling!

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

When someone answers a simple question, which could be dealt with by a single syllable word, with a tome resembling the first three chapters of War And Peace, I wonder what it is that he's hiding......?

Are you blind or stupid! That is the only explanations I can think of for your continual annoying and short sighted replies.

Bobs long winded reply was in response to your continual digs at him. You started the argument. He effectively finished it, but you still can't or won't see it.

You were completely wrong.

Accept it

SIFI

PS do you now admit to being one of many alter egos?

quote:Originally posted by bcrabtree:
Two trace-routes - one for mHp, the other for Eddie Edwards
Are these one and the same person, or is it two people using the same computer?

It's neither. Firstly these traces only point to the same ISP and NOT the same computer/user.

Secondly, Tiscali issues addresses dynamically so it's very easy for a second person to pick up an IP that's just been dropped.

And Eddie's surname is spelt "Edwardes".

Why is spelling such a problem to some people on this board?

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

By the way, the skier spells his surname "Edwards"; but I know you have problems with spelling!

Funny that because I remember a post to which you admitted that it was in relation to the skier. So if spelling is the problem, it was your mistake in the first place.

I am not interested to see what your soon to be thread is all about, but regardless of the facts there is no reason to continually annoy many of the boards other members.

If you have a problem with Bob, thats fine. But do us all a favour and keep it between you and Bob.

SIFI

PS If you are going to have a dig about spelling I would make sure you had all yours correct first.

[This message has been edited by SIFI (edited 17 June 2002).]

quote:Originally posted by Gary MacKenzie:
very interesting since mHp is allegedly running on demons backbone , do a traceroute to www.mikehenson.com and you will see it is a Demon fixed ip. 193.195.37.214

if you use demon you always end up with the same fixed ip number.

So in that case, what you're saying, is that mhP isn't Mike Henson because he's with Demon?

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

You are completely wrong. This whole sorry affair was started by an email to me from Bob Crabtree when I offerred him help around issue 3/4 of the magazine and long before this board existed.

I have monitored this board on and off since its inception.

I posted an advert to sell some surplus equipment in January 2001.

In January 2002 I replied to two postings from people regarding a matter with which I am conversant, my postings, without provocation, were sarcastically attacked.

The full story, complete and unexpurgated, will be posted to this board very soon. Watch this space!

By the way, the skier spells his surname "Edwards"; but I know you have problems with spelling!

quite happy to admit i make mistakes , i mis-spelt a title of a book.
like i said we all make mistakes , then again if you check the spelling for 'sepulchre' and 'sepulcre' in a dictionary .... guess what ..... both are acceptable. http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/sepulchre

quote:Originally posted by Chirpy:
If it wasn't for mhP drawing my attention to this thread (from within another thread) I would probably not have bothered:

Now I wonder why he did that?

"We have an unregistered upgrade copy of Ulead MediaStudio Pro 6.5"

Chirpy, you didn't dwell long enough on the first word "We" - and I'm not talking about the Royal "We"

Nice try!

By the way, whatdya mean, "CAN" be a nice guy, I AM a nice guy - I just treat people the way they treat me!?!

quote:Originally posted by mhP:
So in that case, what you're saying, is that mhP isn't Mike Henson because he's with Demon?

no , just that if he is , he's not willing to attack from an account which under demons aup could be shut down for the annoyance of webusers.

he could just move sideways and uses a tiscali account ........`

but as i said the chances of two webboard members connecting from the same ip is very slim.

a tiscali ip number shouldn't be allocated from a dhcp server that quickly when the first person logs off. bad networking practice.

but i'm sure tiscali would be willing to tell a webmaster who was using a particular ip at a set time if harrassment could be proved !!!!

One mhP is trying to be too clever for his own good. in the post dated 17 June 22.30 he states:

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

It's neither. Firstly these traces only point to the same ISP and NOT the same computer/user.

Secondly, Tiscali issues addresses dynamically so it's very easy for a second person to pick up an IP that's just been dropped.

thus implying that mhP and Eddie Edwardes just happen to both be Tiscali subscribers. Then at 23.43 he posts:

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

Now I wonder why he did that?

"We have an unregistered upgrade copy of Ulead MediaStudio Pro 6.5"

Chirpy, you didn't dwell long enough on the first word "We" - and I'm not talking about the Royal "We"

Nice try!
.

Here by implication he says that Eddie is one of his work colleagues or a family member. Clearly a contradiction. No doubt we will read mHP's explanation for this in due course, which I like many others look forward to. Almost as much as I look forward to England thrashing Brazil on Friday.

Trev

This thread is going no where and should be closed!

Little is going to be acheived by this constant carping and the origonal post has been almost forgoten.

I`ve been labled as aggressive & I make no secret of my feelings towards BC especially the way he ridiculed me after my first post, BUT, I think in the main he does a worthwhile job. As moderator, he should draw a line under this one. I am not qualified to comment on the pro`s & con`s of this argument as to who is right, but I do think that most people are thorourghly sick of this it!

Barry Hunter
Videos for all Occasions

Barry, I'm with you on this one. This thread's long over-run it's usefulness.

And to get back to at least part of the point of it, I've been using XP Home on a P4 since last December. In that time, I've had OHCI and other cards in an out of it almost every week, sometimes more than once a day, and XP hasn't bleated about it at all. I can't see what all the fuss is about.

[This message has been edited by Alan Roberts at work (edited 18 June 2002).]

quote:Originally posted by SIFI:

If you have a problem with Bob, thats fine. But do us all a favour and keep it between you and Bob.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

Barry, Alan, no problem.

I shall make no further postings to this thread.

Winding up the children is good for a laugh but if you guys are getting bored I shall not perpetuate it.

However, on June 17th I raised the issue of restrictive practices, but nobody seems to have picked that one up at all?!?

[This message has been edited by mhP (edited 18 June 2002).]

quote:Originally posted by Bomag:
Bob – where do you get you cheap XP Pros? Normally I can legally get an educational copy of XP for the PCs I build (the licence terms mean about 66% of UK households are eligible!) but standalone retail versions aren’t cheap.

I was indeed referring to low-cost educational copies of XP Pro which are legitimately usable by anyone in education -studying or working - and as you suggest, that includes a huge percentage of potential buyers.

Of course, it's not for me to mention that Microsoft leaves this to the consciences of those who buy the educational version - which is simply the upgrade version of XP Pro with a sticker on the front!

Action Direct's price is well under £50.

Bob C

[This message has been edited by bcrabtree (edited 19 June 2002).]

quote:Originally posted by mhP:

You are completely wrong. This whole sorry affair was started by an email to me from Bob Crabtree when I offerred him help around issue 3/4 of the magazine and long before this board existed.

Christ!

Is that really what it's all about.

I don't remember and, frankly, I don't care.

You've been sniping because of some (probably imagined) slight against you in 1997?

Well, snipe no more - you are banned!

Bob C