CHAOS MANOR MAILMail 123 October 16-22, 2000 |
||
CLICK ON THE BLIMP TO SEND MAIL TO ME The current page will always have the name currentmail.html and may be bookmarked. For previous weeks, go to the MAIL HOME PAGE. FOR THE CURRENT VIEW PAGE CLICK HERE If you are not paying for this place, click here... IF YOU SEND MAIL it may be published; if you want it private SAY SO AT THE TOP of the mail. I try to respect confidences, but there is only me, and this is Chaos Manor. If you want a mail address other than the one from which you sent the mail to appear, PUT THAT AT THE END OF THE LETTER as a signature. I try to answer mail, but mostly I can't get to all of it. I read it all, although not always the instant it comes in. I do have books to write too... I am reminded of H. P. Lovecraft who slowly starved to death while answering fan mail.
Search: type in string and press return.
or the freefind search
|
||
If you subscribed: If you didn't and haven't, why not? Highlights this week: Search: type in string and press return.
|
||
This week: | Monday
October 16, 2000
Running low on time. But Eric has an important messag: A very interesting new project in massively parallel, voluntary computing is Folding@Home: http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/Cosm/ Much like the SETI folks this allows people to contribute spare CPU time on their systems. The difference is that the public domain results of this project are unquestionably going to have a significant effect on the future of humankind. Eric Pobirs He's right in more ways than one. SETI has a low probability of a high impact. This has a higher probability of a high impact. And the development of massive parallel computing for the people has a tremendous impact on encryption and secrecy... Does anyone know why I would get this in mail? dear jerry Ali Khan It is interesting to speculate on, isn't it? I wonder what I would have to charge if I did answer that? I think we need a special BYTE article on this: This qaz trojan is continuing to affect my computer. I have had a number of problems and, in the course of trying to correct them I re-installed w98se. During the final reboot I got an error saying that Notepad could not find a file called QAZWSX.HSQ. Did I want to creat it? No. I close Notepad and opened the registry with Norton Registry Editor. There was the offending line under Run, telling Notepad to open QAZWSX.HSQ. I looked in the windows directory and Notpad was the right size. I cannot find this file on any partition in my computer. I suspect that there is another infected file that runs at startup but can't imagine how it got here. Have you any further thoughts or experiences about all this? - Jeffrey Latham [jglatham@dakotacom.net] architect Nogales, Arizona To get rid of this entirely: First, delete Notepad.exe Copy a new copy of Notepad.exe from a reliable source. It will be well under 100K. Copy THAT copy of Notepad.exe to the file name note.com; this is prophylactic since the qaz worm doesn't seem to attack systems that have note.com in the Windows Director. Now use msconfig.exe or startup manager to go in and eliminate the line that tells the system to run notepad.exe qazwsx.hsq. This is not strictly necessary since you have already got rid of the worm but the startup message is annoying and you may as well get rid of it. The QAZ thing is a signal and isn't a real file anyway. More another time. Dr. Pournelle, This is the first I have heard of any of this including of the existence of the club. Nor do I know how someone can ruin a club to the point that it goes out of existence. I'll try to look into this when I get back from a trip.
|
This week: | Tuesday,
Off Line |
This week: |
Wednesday,
October 18, 2000
> But WHO bites on this crap? Who buys from spammers? Who are their customers? Here is my speculation, but I'd bet I'm right. Very few (if any) spammers actually make money by sending spam. No one in his right mind bites on offers for make-money-fast, Viagra by mail, chain-letter schemes, and so on. I'd bet that a spammer who sends out 1,000,000 spams offering a get-rich-quick scheme probably doesn't receive more than 10 orders at most--not worth his time or enough to cover his (admittedly small) costs. There just aren't enough stupid, naive people around to be taken advantage of by something as clearly worthless as a spam offer. So the poor spammer finds that he's spent more buying his mailing list and his software than he grosses on his mailing. But there are a few people stupid and naive enough to believe spam can work. And nearly all of them have become spammers themselves. They're the only ones stupid enough to believe in spam. So they order the 10,000,000 names CD and the bulk mailing software, and they set out to make their millions, not realizing that anyone stupid enough to actually send money in response to a spam message is already a spammer himself. So it seems to me that going after the spammers themselves is not the way. They'll send their 1,000,000 or 10,000,000 or 100,000,000 messages with no result. Even though they're incredibly stupid by definition, even they are smart enough to see that it's not working, so they stop spamming. Then some other stupid person decides to change his life, so he buys the 10,000,000 name disc and the software, and starts mailing his stupid messages to all of us. The way to put an end to spam is to track down and kill the people who sell the mailing lists and the software. What they've done is make it easy enough to spam that even someone stupid enough to spam can do it. Without them, the spammers wouldn't be able to figure out how to spam or who to spam to. In fact, they probably have trouble tying their shoelaces, but that's another problem. -- Robert Bruce Thompson thompson@ttgnet.com http://www.ttgnet.com I expect you are right, but I am not sure how to go about it. Tailored viruses? Jerry, Boiling oil seems a bit drastic for dealing with spammers. Earthlink seems to have the right idea, though. From abuse@mindspring.net Wed Oct 18 12:40:25 2000 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:42:39 -0400 (EDT) From: abuse@mindspring.net To: thegrendel@theriver.com Subject: RE : *^* Save up to 70% on Your Life Insurance -FREE Quote (000925-16334244) Hello, The account responsible has been located, terminated and billed for cleanup costs. EarthLink does not condone and will not permit abusive behavior by its users. ... Tracing spam back to its source, its originating ISP, is still something of an art. On a UNIX or Linux system, "nslookup", "dig", "traceroute", and "whois" are useful tools for unmasking spam with spoofed headers. Windows has the "tracert" command, which is the equivalent of UNIX "traceroute". On-line resources, such as Arin's "Spam Tracer" site, http://www.arin.net/whois/arinwhois.html , make spam scouting easy even for the inexperienced. My own idea for spam prophylaxis is to set up a bounty system for nailing offenders. The first five persons to report a spammer back to the originating ISP of the spam would each get a $10 reward. Of course, the spammer would be assessed the bounties, along with all associated administrative costs. I, and I'm sure a good number of others, could make quite a good living collecting such bounties. Instead of looking at spammers as a problem, consider them a potential resource. Of course, if bounties and fines are insufficiently discouraging to spammers, we could always resort to Larry Niven's idea of incorporating them into a pool of involuntary organ donors <grin>. I have tried to be conscientious about reporting at least some spam to spamcop every day, but I find when I do that I get even MORE than when I don't do it.
|
This week: |
Thursday,
October 19, 2000
Hi Jerry... First a few links for the linkpage: http://cryptome.org/ Cryptome is a clearinghouse for primarily US and UK intelligence tech and news items, but a decent amount of international stuff creeps in. http://www.freesco.org Freesco is a single floppy Internet sharing solution which is braindead simple to install and configure. http://www.hazegray.org/ Haze Gray and Underway - Just about everything you wanted to know about the navy. And now on to spam... Unlike postal addresses, most people's email addresses are paid for by their own wages, webmail services excepted. Since one of the main products of spammers is spamming software and mail lists, shouldn't users be entitled to cut a of the action on mailing lists sales? Say five cents per list? Granted, that means paying 2-3 cents per list to a lawyer to recover the fees, but that's a small sacrifice. That will also likely shift spam economies to selling either address harvesting software, or spam services. It's a start, and certainly likely to pass constitutional muster. Rabid antispam techies would be able to find plenty of paying work for lawyers recovering such fees for spam recipients. Spammers would be brought forth to disclose where they purchased their databases from. And imagine extrapolating that idea to email services such as Yahoo, whose spamguard already catches tons of spam, and Hotmail. They have plenty of techies, and sufficient batteries of lawyers to likely ensure that their users would never be spammed again. Just a thought, and, as always, feel free to publish. Bruce bkd69@yahoo.com
|
This week: |
Friday, October
20, 2000
Dear Dr. Pournelle: In Friday's VIEW, you opined: > Moral: Intel and 3Com hubs cost about 3 times as much as Netgear. > They are also more reliable. Reliable is a relative term: this is the > first failure of any Netgear hub in years, and we use many of them. > It cost me about an hour of my time. I would have saved money by > buying a 3Com, as it happens, except that in my case this gave me > something to write about. You probably won't have that upside. I have about 200 ports here. In the seven years since we changed from ARCNET, have changed form concentrators to switches to faster switches, so let's say I've had about 600 ports to oversee. Using the 3Com gear you cite (and spendier versions than most users would buy), I've had four ports on a variety of concentrators fail, plus on entire switch go dead (a month past end-of-warranty). >From my sample, that's a failure rate of .006; how does that stack up to the Netgear, failures-vs-samples? FYI, I'm in a building with large and constant loads in the downtown core of an area with very clean power (the Pacific NW has the lowest surge-and-spike rate in the nation as per a Nat'l. Power Laboratory Power Quality Study quoted by APC), and EVERYHTING runs on an APC Net7 or Net7T surge protector (rated at <40v passthrough during a spike or surge using the UL-1449 standard test). I suspect your residential area up on a ridge or crest (I've seen your pix of walks w/ Sasha) does not have the same steady power as my office does. Point I'm trying to make is the 3Com gear is by no means infallible, even when used by professionals with precautions in a relatively safer environment. I doubt that 3Com would have saved you any time, even billing at what you are worth ($300/hr as a consultant?). -- Very happy that Phillip was not on the COLE, and had thought of him when I heard the news, as it slipped my mind what ship he was on. Thank you kindly. -- John Bartley, PC syadmin, USBC/DO, Portland OR Views expressed herein are mine own. "LOS ANGELES: A city of millions; thousands more are born each day. Some in maternity wards, some in creche incubators. The Artificial ones don't have civil rights, but they still need the law. That's why they turn to me. My name is Friday. I carry a badge." -- Robert A. Heinlein's "Dragnet" <<Courtesy Ray Radelin>> Good points. I probably ought to rethink the situation. In any case I have put tape over that one bad port and will continue to use the Netgear concentrator. Dr. Pournelle, Regarding power failures: I had a similar problem with a computer owned by a human-service organization which is housed in the church where I work. This organization is not connected to our LAN and has only one computer. After a power failure, they couldn't get their machine to do anything except show the "on" indicator light. I wound up getting the machine to work by unplugging it. The only thing that makes sense to me is some type of power management glitch. All this power management reminds me of the '70s, when college libraries shut off their copiers "to save energy"--it should have been obvious to the veriest dolt that frequent power-cycling would increase problems with copiers that student treated none too gently anyway. One additional service call per month probably caused the service technician's truck to burn more energy just driving there than than any campus saved by having the copiers turned off. Maybe a case could be made to the EPA that spammers are wasting energy and causing pollution? jomath Hi, Jerry. I believe that on many Intel 810 and 815 motherboards, holding down the power switch for 4 seconds will do a hard powerup or powerdown. --Mike Fessler I believe that too, but it sure didn't work.
Dr. Pournelle, I have worked on three systems this year, that I can recall, with the same problem: dead, cycling the switch doesn't bring it back. Call the tech (me). Well, for the first two, when we got the pc back to our shop to check it out, it worked fine. We noticed the coincidence. All different manufacturers, but, all Pentium II or III, ATX boards. Somehow or another, some sort of static charge or such must be binding up the power supplies, causing them not to switch on. Several minutes later, more than 10, and after unplugging the system from the wall, it will dissipate, and begin to work. Not yet ready for prime time technology, if you ask me. I haven't noticed whether or not an AMD based system will do the same, though I imagine so, it seems to be rooted in the ATX power supply. And if I am not loosing my mind, I seem to recall that all the power supplies were Enlight. Yours too? I use Pournelle's Law religiously, 90% of problems are with the cable, but perhaps we should create a new law governing ATX power supplies? If the machine is dead, unplug it for half an hour and try again. Just a note to let you know you aren't the only one cursed by temperamental machines. George Laiacona III <george@eisainc.com> ICQ 37042478/ 28885038 "Son, when you participate in sporting events, it's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get." -Homer Simpson Hi Jerry, The problem you describe with your i815/PIII-933 happens occasionally with ATX power supplies. Not all brands seem to do it, but whenever we have a power failure at work invariably there are a half-dozen or so systems that don't come back up, so we run around pulling plugs, waiting 10 seconds, then plugging back in and powering on. An ATX computer that's powered off is never truly powered off unless it's unplugged--you can get an indication of this by watching the Wake-on-LAN lights on certain network cards. Plug a recent 3Com NIC into a LAN, and it lights up even if the computer's not on. As for hubs, I concur with you that Bay Netgear hubs are pretty reliable. How much less reliable than a 3Com or an Intel, I'm not sure. I've seen a number of 3Com hubs with one or two bad ports, but the rest of the hub is still OK, so we just tape over that port to keep from using it again. I don't have any experience with Intel hubs. I suspect 3Coms and Intels may be more reliable because they do cost more but without a comparable sample size of Netgears to compare it's only a suspicion. I don't hesitate to buy Netgear stuff, but I will say I avoid anything cheaper than Netgear. I came home one day to find my NDC hub totally dead for no explicable reason, and I had a cheap D-Link NE2000 clone NIC die out of the blue after about a year of service. I don't find $15 NICs to be worth the trouble. And with 3Com and Intel cards sometimes selling for $35 or $40, I really wonder if my next NIC won't be a tier-one brand, seeing as that's what I was paying for Netgears a year or so ago and less than I was paying for no-name cards two years ago. -- Dave Farquhar Author, Editor and Systems Analyst Mail: dfarq@swbell.net Web: www.access2k1.net/users/farquhar
Dr. Pournelle - Thank you for all you do, and trying things so we don't have to. "A power failure that lasts longer than the UPS was a pretty serious test." While preparing for the possible Y2K events, I thought through this issue. Most UPS units only have enough battery for 15 or 20 minutes, but you don't have to accept that. My main UPS is now equipped with a large external deep cycle battery from Sam's Club which will keep it running for many hours (estimated at 1/2 day if all computers are on). Wireless phones, DSL Router and Firewall/switch are also on this power, but not the printer or scanner. The 12 volt power connections are on quick disconnects wired according to the ham radio common practice, and arraigned so I can switch batteries by plugging in the second battery before disconnecting the first. My furnace is equipped with a manual changeover to an inverter run by a couple of golf cart batteries. This did not require the more expensive UPS since no one will freeze, nor will anything be damaged if power is out for a few hours. The batteries will run the furnace for 24 to 36 hours depending on how cold it is out. This was tested by killing the power and seeing how long I could run. If the power is out for more than a few hours, I can drag out the generator. I bought a large battery charger which will bring all the deep cycle batteries back up to full charge from dead in no more than 5 hours of running the generator. Gas is treated with stabilizer and stored protected from the weather but outdoors away from the house. Marine grade Amsoil synthetic oil is in the generator. What you reminded me to do before this winter is: 1) check the acid level in all the deep cycles and top them with distilled water 2) check the charge state in each cell 3) charge the batteries as needed 4) change the oil in the generator 5) run the generator for an hour under load 6) dump the stored gas into the auto tanks and put fresh gas with stabilizer into storage 7) run another drill with power off to confirm that everything still runs as long as I expect 8) recharge the batteries after the drill :>) 9) test all the radios, AM/FM/SW, family radio band, ham, CB None of this is very expensive to do (except buying the generator - which also has other uses). I hope others may get some ideas from this. Ray Rayburn Audio (at) Technologist (dot) com Jerry, I can't verify the accuracy of this, but it sounds authentic to me. BTW, I'm really glad your son wasn't on this ship - as I know you are, too. My first cousin was in this area on another ship just last year. A lot of families are giving thanks for those who weren't there, even as we pray for those that weren't so fortunate. JA -- John Alexander Faculty Resource Center The University of Alabama johnalex@bama.ua.edu ---------- Forwarded message: My brother is a civilian employee with the Navy and sent this to me. Toni I just got an e-mail from a good friend of mine who flys SH-60B's off the USS Hawes. I thought you might like to read it. "It wasn't until a few days ago though, that we started doing something that I feel may be the first thing I've seen in my short Naval career that has truly made a difference. Right now we're supporting the USS COLE and her crew in Aden. When the attack occurred we were a day away. Just by luck we happened to be on our way out of the Gulf and headed towards the Suez and could get here in a relatively short amount of time. I know what you all have seen on CNN, because we have seen it too. I just want you all to know that what you see doesn't even scratch the surface. I'm not going to get into it for obvious reasons. But I will tell you that right now there are 250+ sailors just a few miles away living in hell on Earth. I'm sitting in a nice air conditioned state room, they're sleeping out on the decks at night. You can't even imagine the conditions they're living in, and yet they are still fighting 24 hours a day to save their ship and free the bodies of those still trapped and send them home. As bad as it is, they're doing an incredible job. The very fact that these people are still functioning is beyond my comprehension. Whatever you imagine as the worst, multiply it by ten and you might get there. Today I was tasked to photo rig the ship and surrounding area. It looked so much worse than I had imagined, unbelievable really, with debris and disarray everywhere, the ship listing, the hole in her side. I wish I had the power to relay to you all what I have seen, but words just won't do it. I do want to tell you the first thing that jumped out at me - the Stars and Stripes flying. I can't tell you how that made me feel...even in this God forsaken hell hole our flag was more beautiful than words can describe. Then I started to notice the mass of activity going on below, scores of people working non-stop in 90 plus degree weather to save this ship. They're doing it with almost no electrical power and they're sleeping (when they can sleep) outside on the decks because they can't stand the smell or the heat or the darkness inside. They only want to eat what we bring them because they're all scared of eating something brought by the local vendors. Even with all that, the USS COLE and her crew is sending a message guys, and it's that even acts of cowardice and hate can do nothing to the spirit and pride of the United States. I have never been so proud of what I do, or of the men and women that I serve with as I was today. There are sixteen confirmed dead sailors who put it on the line for all of us, and some of them are still trapped here. Please take a minute to pray for their families and say a word of thanks for their sacrifice - one made so that we can live the lives that we do. All of you that serve with me, thank you. All of you that have loved ones that serve, thank you." Please feel free to pass this on to those you think will appreciate it. Subj: Power cycling It's not just ATX power supplies... One of the first things I learned when learning to fly the F-15E was that about 95% of all system glitches (radar, navigation, displays, jammers, etc) can be solved this way, progressing to the next step until the system starts working again: 1) Perform built-in-test cycle and clear error codes out of computer memory 2) Perform soft reset (on-standby-on, or reset switch) 3) Perform hard reset (some systems have a hard-reset switch which also dumps memory) 4) Perform power cycle on malfuctioning system 5) Turn off malfuctioning system, go through steps 1-4 on display processor, turn system back on 6) Turn display processor off, power cycle malfunctioning system, turn display processor on 7) Turn off malfunctioning system, cycle power on central computer (dumps all navigation and weapons data), run BIT tests on all required systems, turn on malfunctioning system 8) Turn off malfunctioning system, forget about it for a while, turn it back on sometime later in the mission. This isn't exactly a written procedure, but I would generally follow this progression of steps starting when the system glitch was noticed until engine shutdown. If the system still didn't work by the time I landed, check the computer for error codes and turn the whole mess over to maintenance. Minor glitches and failures were common, but rarely would a system remain completely unusable. Sean Long seanlong@micron.net My experience is similar, and I tend to pull the plug between resets, but I can remember old linear power supplies with half a Farad of capacitance. On the old S-100 bus systems you could pull the plug and shove it back in again fast and the machines wouldn't know you had done that... Hi Jerry, Dave Farquhar makes a good point when he states: "An ATX computer that's powered off is never truly powered off unless it's unplugged--you can get an indication of this by watching the Wake-on-LAN lights on certain network cards. " We should remember this when servicing the newer machines. I know it had been my habit to not disconnect the power cable on XT and AT boxes so that I could physically ground myself when changing boards, or use a grounded wrist strap grounded to the case. Ground can be difficult to find in a residential or office environment. Now with the ATX machines, it's not a good idea to do this as the motherboard is never truely powered down and boards will still have some power applied even in the 'supposed' powered off state. Consequently, I'm less likely to use good antistatic techniques, now. Not good, but replacing boards with 'any' amount of power applied is surely less safe. John rice@vx5.com
|
This week: | Saturday,
October 21, 2000
Dr. Pournelle, You said: > Moral: Intel and 3Com hubs cost about 3 times as much as Netgear. They are also more reliable In my experience it is not particularly uncommon to have single ports on an Ethernet device fail. I have seen it with Cabletron, Cisco, 3Com, Bay, you name it. In addition, once a single port fails, it seems that the likelihood of additional port failures on that device in the future increases exponentially. So now whenever I see a port failure on a device, I replace the device immediately, on the theory that equipment is almost always less expensive than my troubleshooting time. --Dave Dave Pierce Network Engineering Manager Synteleos, Inc. www.synteleos.com dpierce@synteleos.com Thinks. I have to report that I just bought another Bay Networks hub. It was what they had at Fry's while I was out there for something else, and I needed to expand the capabilities in the Cable room. I am rethinking my position on these things. If I can have two of them for the price of the "better" one, and the cheaper one doesn't fail very often and when it does it's not total, there's a moral in that story too.
Hi Jerry, An interesting comment on your power problem: This isn't just due to power loss. I have occasionally had severe software bugs that will cause the PC I am working on to immediately power off. The only way to get the box to power back up was to temporarily pull the plug. I'm sure it was a software problem (and, thus, not a power problem) because every time it has happened I was behind a very expensive, very reliable UPS that runs our building. And the fact that it has happened more than once (both to me and other programmers I work with, although not simultaneously) is pretty good evidence that I wasn't the victim of a UPS hiccup. Besides, if the UPS hiccups, so does the building, which makes it pretty obvious... Glad to hear that you are feeling better and your son is safe... What has happened to the USS Cole gives me twisted visions of the Atlanta Braves Tomahawk chant (ala Raytheon)... - Lackey: "Sir, I am happy to report that the bombing mission is completed. The damage inflicted was extensive." Colonel: "Very good, Akhmed. Bin Laden will be pleased." Radioman: "Sir, we have some unusual radio traffic." Colonel: "What do you have to report?" Radioman: "We are hearing something, but we are not sure what it is..." Colonel: "Put it on speaker." As the radioman flips the switch to route the audio from his headphones to the speaker, the room is filled with a strange music. It is strangely entrancing, strangely beautiful. Everyone is quiet, captivated by the resonating, rhythmic chant. And the audible whine of the turbo-fan engine briefly beats the cruise missile to the bunker... Fade to blue (as in Cherenkov...) - Sites to add to your links page: Some interesting US Navy facts and stats: http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ffiletop.html Very useful for developers and consultants: Microsoft file version information: http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/fileversion/dllinfo.asp ANSI: http://web.ansi.org/default_js.htm RFC: http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/information/rfc.html Some good modem info: http://www.56k.com/ Ken Thanks. I've added the links to the links page. Then I get silly letters like this one. Mr. Pournelle, I just read your article at www.byte.com regarding Microsoft licensing policies. Your information in this matter was very helpful and informative to me. However, at the end of the article, you included a small piece about how a system freeze occurred on your system while running Windows ME on a computer with an 815E chipset motherboard and a Voodoo5 3d graphics card. First, I would like to point out that while the drivers you replaced were most likely the culprit and hardware manufacturers are just now getting all their products to work reliably in the new Windows ME OS, full system freezes (or lock-ups) as you described are often the result of an overheated system, especially if you are using a Pentium III with its thermal diode, which stops the CPU cycles when it detects a dangerously high temperature. The Voodoo5 also employs similar technology in order to prevent fried components. If your problem persists, my advice to you would be to increase the amount of cooling in your system. If, however, you do decide to throw out that Voodoo5, I would be more than happy to take it off your hands. As a matter of fact, I would gladly take it off your hands for nothing, as you obviously and foolishly believe that the Voodoo5, the state-of-the-art in 3d graphics cards with its ability to beautifully render more than a billion pixels per second, is no more valuable than the considerably slower and uglier software-driven, system memory-hogging on-board graphics on your 815E motherboard. Sincerely, Rick Paget rickpdx@home.com
I do seem to have been very unclear in my column. Leaving out the heavy sarcasm of the letter, it's clear that this reader did not understand that I reported what was a very unusual situation. I probably should have noted that this is usually caused by overheating, but that since I had been running that system with a Voodoo board for weeks without any problems, my inference was that this wasn't simple hear. I reported what happened. When you are exercising a high performance board, you can expect certain problems; when it is doing no more than running WORD you don't expect them, or at least hope not to have them. Of course people who only use their systems for games will have a different view. Since that one incident there has been no problem with the Voodoo 5 and the Pentium 933 system. Since the failure was unlike any other I have seen -- Word doesn't usually lost text, and I never had a system lock in quite that way, in the middle of a cut and paste operation, I conclude that there was some kind of driver conflict. Why that would be fixed by turning off the system is not entirely clear, but it seems to have done it. My usual rule when installing new drivers is to shut down to power off, but that time I didn't. Clearly I had to after the lockup. Since there has been no repetition (and hadn't been been for some time before I wrote that column) I have to conclude that this was a one-time error, probably caused by not shutting down as opposed to allowing reset, after installing the new drivers. I do caution people that sometimes you really do have to power down when changing software. It usually does no harm, it may do some good, and every now and then it's vital. Bottom line, thanks for the offer, but I put the Voodoo 5 board in hoping to fix some problems with the built-in 815 video, which is more than good enough for text and FreeCell and the stuff people often use machines for, but clearly can't touch high performance games. And since installing that and getting the drivers working, the lockups have gone away, and Everquest works a great deal better. If you play Everquest you need a Voodoo board... Roland sends the following, which I bit on... http://www.racecondition.com/msad.jpg ----------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <mordant@gothik.org> / One of the surest signs of the philistine is his reverence for the superior tastes of those who put him down. -- Pauline Kael
|
This week: | Sunday,
October 22, 2000
The power switch on the front of an ATX computer is a momentary push button. It isn't really a power switch; it sends a power on/off request, as it were, to the power supply. I used to have a computer with the usual momentary switch on the front, but the power supply itself had an actual on/off switch. In normal use, you would never touch that; if you pushed the front on/off to turn it off, the computer would be off but the rear actual on/off would still be in the "on" position. All that switch really bought was a more convenient way to hard-cycle the power; without it, you need to unplug the power cable. Once you unplug the power cable and wait five seconds for any capacitors to drain, you have well and truly turned the computer off. Once you plug it back in, it becomes semi-alive, i.e. just alive enough to notice a push of the button on the front. For a while I was struggling with buggy video card drivers, and my computer kept crashing hard. After each hard crash, the only reliable way to reboot was to unplug the power cable; the computer no longer noticed the on/off request from the front power button. By the way, I don't think this is stupid. I like being able to actually turn the computer off from the "shut down" menu, and that implies the momentary switch rather than the old fashioned actual on/off switch. -- Steve R. Hastings "Vita est" steve@hastings.org http://www.blarg.net/~steveha Yes, I know it's not a bug it's a feature, but I am not sure I like it. Perhaps it's for the best. I just need to remember how to recover.
|