|
JimmyRopes wrote:
It is shameless that Micro$oft not only releases software that is not throughly tested in the first place
Microsoft exists to make money. Whether or not you agree with that goal, the number of bugs that make it into released software will depend on the financial impact of those bugs. Does this crash happen only in extreme scenarios? Is it worth the time to track it down? How many customers will be affected by this bug? Are they likely to be put off by this bug enough to switch to a competitor's product?
Change some nouns and you'll realize it's exactly the same scenario as any other commercial venture. There is nothing shameless about it.
JimmyRopes wrote:
to add insult to injury they want you to debug it for them gratis.
Congratulations on achieving bug-free software. I, myself, am not quite there yet, so when a customer calls me and tells me my app failed, I'm certainly glad most are willing to send crash dumps and data files so that I can fix the problem and improve their user experience.
JimmyRopes wrote:
I do not work for Micro$oft and will not spend time debugging faulty applications for them free of charge.
How much would you charge them to click the "Send" button? The process it pretty much automated.
JimmyRopes wrote:
What if the offending program does not belong to Micro$oft but has encountered a problem interfacing with Micro$oft software. Would it be right to provide Micro$oft with a binary image of a competitors product in a failure state?
ISVs can subscribe[^] to the information collected by the Windows Error Reporting tool.
Please don't misunderstand me and think I'm against you wanting to turn this prompt off. I just don't quite get where all the (admittedly only perceived) hostility comes from.
Charlie
if(!curlies){ return; }
|
|
|
|
|
Working with Micro$oft products.
|
|
|
|
|
Hostility towards Microsoft is not difficult to find on the Net, and it blends two strains:
Resentful people who feel Microsoft is too powerful and disdainful people who think it's tacky.
This is all strongly reminiscent of the heyday of Communism and Socialism, when the bourgeoisie were hated from both ends. By the proles, because they had all the money, and by the intelligentsia, because of their tendency to spend it on lawn ornaments.
Microsoft is the very embodiment of modern high-tech prosperity, it is in a word, bourgeois and so it attracts all of the same gripes.
sierrachow
|
|
|
|
|
You bring up an interesting observation but it is decidedly off topic on this thread.
Post this on the Soapbox or the Lounge and I will respond.
Please let me know where you decided to post it as I don't regulary check either of those threads.
|
|
|
|
|
I recently completed a version of a messaging application I had developed using C#. It worked fine in Windows XP SP1, but upon running it on Windows XP SP2, the operation to connect to multiple Hosts using TCP sockets took 8 minutes instead of 40 seconds! I traced the problem down to a changes Microsoft have made in SP2 that limits the number of simultaneous incomplete outbound TCP connection attempts. Microsofts resolution to this limitation? "Stop the application that is responsible for the failing connection attempts." 
I am now required to re-architect my application after convincing myself the app was close to release status - all thanks to Windows XP SP2!
I urge anyone undertaking development for Windows XP to read the Microsoft article Changes in functionality in Microsoft Windows XP Service Pack 2[^] that points out the changes that may affect an application. Even if your not using SP2 now, chances are future versions/service packs of windows will include the same limitations...ahem...I mean 'functionality' 
TC
Live and die by the code!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm very happy to hear you could solve your problem 
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
well this issues is really bugging my mind for the last week... and i didnt understand anything about it yet.... well the story goes that a few weeks back my Windows XP suddenly stopped booting, displaying me the good old BLUE SCREEN ..... when i removed one of my harddrive it started working perfectly. Now come the interesting part, as i booted my system on win98 with the harddrive attached it booted smoothly  . Now what i want is to do is, delete the NTFS partitions in the extended DOS partition but win98 doesnt allow me to do that using FDISK ......
So, if anyone could help with this issue or tell me any software that could delete the partition table completely please mail me ASAP at je_shoaib@hotmail.com..... or reply to the msg.
waiting.....
shoaib
|
|
|
|
|
I used to be installing windows 98 many time before, but now I prefer to use winxp or 2000. As far as I know, FDSIK utilities in win98 have an option call "Delete non DOS partition" in the delete section. This option allow you to delete the partition with NFTS file system. Because I left win98 for a long time, so I'm not sure too but try to use this option. If you don't prefer this option, you could attach your hard disk drive to another system with win2k/xp then use disk management to delete its partition.
Hope it is working!!
A thousand mile of journey, begin with the first step.
APO-CEDC
Save Children Norway-Cambodia Office
|
|
|
|
|
Just about every hard drive manufacturer has a utility, usually on their website, to "wipe" or write zero's to the hard drive.
I perfer to use the maufacturer's one over win98 fdisk, because it normaly comes with utilities to check the drive for errors.
i.e. Segate's is called DiskWizard.. ect. ect..
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
You can try Partition Magic. And one more this i need to remind you that ' it is not possible to remove a ntfs partiton while heeping a FAT 16. If you would have intall your both 98 and xp in Fat32 then some times we can figurout and keep a chance for escape from your problem.
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
Did you ever have a different operating system on the disk in question?
I remember getting into booting trouble once because the boot.ini file on my primary partition made reference to an operating system on a secondary disk that I had reformatted without first uninstalling the operating system from which would have updated the boot.ini file.
If that fits your problem and if your primary partition is formatted NTFS you are in trouble because your Win98 system will not recognize it. If on the other hand your primary partition is FAT formatted boot using Win98 and edit out references to the secondary disk that do not actually exist anymore in the boot.ini file and try to boot again with WimXP.
|
|
|
|
|
Thankx to all for all the help you provided. But i think after some research i suggest that the only solution to this problem is to delete the partition table completely from your harddrive.You can do it using the DEBUG utility provided with win98. information regarding this can be found at the following link
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;106419[^]
as far as the option in FDISK to delete non-dos patition is conserned.... well it normally fails...
thankx again......
|
|
|
|
|
I have two windows 98 PCs, and they are connected to network. One of them has the connection to the internet via dial up modem. I would like to know if there is any posibility to connect other PC to the internet by means of first PC.
Do I have to change OS or not????
|
|
|
|
|
In win98se It's called Internet connection sharing and you'll find it in the windows help file.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you use dialup connection, check the property of your internet connection at the first computer and you will find the information about Internet connection sharing. Try to read the information from here[^] for more information.
A thousand mile of journey, begin with the first step.
APO-CEDC
Save Children Norway-Cambodia Office
|
|
|
|
|
|
My hard drive (all of 2 years old and 80 Gb) has started to make strange noises when in use.
My question is: "Is it possible to clone this drive onto another new hard drive"? - If so how? - please
Also if possible could I clone it to a larger hard drive, say a 120 Gb.
By cloning I mean once the drive has been cloned I would remove it and have the other drive (new)be the usual C: drive with all the installed programs in place.
grahamfff
|
|
|
|
|
Partition Magic and Ghost are two apps I know of that can do that.
--Mike--
Personal stuff:: Ericahist | Homepage
Shareware stuff:: 1ClickPicGrabber | RightClick-Encrypt
CP stuff:: CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ
----
Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?
I think so Brain, but if we shaved our heads, we'd look like weasels!
Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?
I think so Brain, but if we shaved our heads, we'd look like weasels!
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
nortan Gost is the good one than partition magic.
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I use windows 2000 and windows xp in my workgroup. When I want to remote access from windows 2000 to windows xp, I have to use Remote Desktop connection to windows xp then I can log on windows xp via remote access. But I want to know how to access windows 2000 from windows xp. I want to see the screen of windows 2000 display on windows xp as i use windows 2000 to view windows xp via remote desktop connection.
A thousand mile of journey, begin with the first step.
APO-CEDC
Save Children Norway-Cambodia Office
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 2000 does not support this feature without Windows Terminal Services (separate purchased product) or similar.
For free, you could try WinVNC. Note that it does not work exactly the same as remote desktop.
my blog
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
U need to install xp on both machine their you are trying to connect.
**************************
S r e e j i t h N a i r
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry that the computer in my house already set with difference of windows version. On the other hand, I also want to use differce OS version in my house for testing purpose only.
A thousand mile of journey, begin with the first step.
APO-CEDC
Save Children Norway-Cambodia Office
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I can't work this out.
What we'd like to do is to set the password policy for the domain user accounts only, not affecting any local accounts created on the workstations which are members of the domain. Ideally, we'd like to set different policies for different subsets of users, but I don't think that's possible. We often have to test hand-held systems connecting through RAS to an FTP server, for example, and don't want to have to fit the password scheme for these systems (where it's often pretty hard to type extended characters, for example!) into the domain password policy.
Anyone know if what I'm after is possible, and if so, how do I get it to work? I already know that I can edit the Default Domain Policy to apply password policy.
So far I've tried adding a new GPO ('Password Restrictions') to the Domain Controllers OU. Resultant Set Of Policy (Planning) on the domain controller shows the correct settings, but Resultant Set of Policy (Logging) does not. Running gpupdate has no effect, even with the /force switch.
The domain controller runs Windows Server 2003 and the domain is at Windows 2000 Native functional level.
Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
