Primary IDE Controller Problem

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I recently bought a new hard disk (Seagate Barracuda 80GB 7200rpm)
because my old hard disk (Seagate 40GB) has started to go bad.
Although, it already started giving a sign (noisy, system hanging) a
few a months ago. But that's not the problem.
I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on
it and someting is not right. The OS kept crashing at all times not
loading programs properly. Although it boots up normally. I also nitced
that in my device manager, there's an error in "primary ide
controller". I thought it was a driver issue so i downloaded an updated
driver (posted last 2002, not an updated one), reformat, reinstall the
os, drivers, and so on and still it the error is still in there. I
already connected cable properly and still the same. Also, it bothers
that before i 1st formated the disk, in boot up, it shows a message the
drive cannot checked because it was formated, a virus or third party
software which i disabled before the old disk got failed. I know that
is normal, but is there any problem in that? Also during virus scan,
it says that mbr can't be scanned because it is not present. I also get
a boot i/o error log commandline virus scanning. Is this a virus
problem. my previous got whacked because it might be a virus lurking in
the system and memory which my antivirus can't detect. Only a memtool
detects that there might be a virus in the memory. I also installed and
tested Linux OS in the previous hd which it might had a virus bcoz of
the IT magazines with free cds that i bought that i didn't scanned b4.
Any advice or help 4 this problem. Tnx in advance.
18 answers Last reply
More about primary controller problem
  1. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    > I recently bought a new hard disk (Seagate Barracuda 80GB 7200rpm)
    > because my old hard disk (Seagate 40GB) has started to go bad.
    > Although, it already started giving a sign (noisy, system hanging) a
    > few a months ago. But that's not the problem.
    > I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on
    > it and someting is not right. The OS kept crashing at all times not
    > loading programs properly. Although it boots up normally. I also nitced
    > that in my device manager, there's an error in "primary ide
    > controller". I thought it was a driver issue so i downloaded an updated
    > driver (posted last 2002, not an updated one), reformat, reinstall the
    > os, drivers, and so on and still it the error is still in there. I
    > already connected cable properly and still the same. Also, it bothers
    > that before i 1st formated the disk, in boot up, it shows a message the
    > drive cannot checked because it was formated, a virus or third party
    > software which i disabled before the old disk got failed. I know that
    > is normal, but is there any problem in that? Also during virus scan,
    > it says that mbr can't be scanned because it is not present. I also get
    > a boot i/o error log commandline virus scanning. Is this a virus
    > problem. my previous got whacked because it might be a virus lurking in
    > the system and memory which my antivirus can't detect. Only a memtool
    > detects that there might be a virus in the memory. I also installed and
    > tested Linux OS in the previous hd which it might had a virus bcoz of
    > the IT magazines with free cds that i bought that i didn't scanned b4.
    > Any advice or help 4 this problem. Tnx in advance.

    What motherboard do you have?
  2. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Peter wrote:

    > What motherboard do you have?

    My mb is kobian(mercury) KOB P4M266. Since its a seagate hd, maybe it
    does require a seagate hd tool to format the disk. bcoz i used a
    startup disk to format the new one.
  3. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    > I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on
    > it and someting is not right.

    There's one problem. If you don't want Windows XP, go back to Windows
    98 or 2000. Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I
    can't think of any worse commercial OS's.

    > The OS kept crashing at all times not
    > loading programs properly.

    Sounds about right.

    > Although it boots up normally. I also nitced
    > that in my device manager, there's an error in "primary ide
    > controller".

    What's the error message, specifically?

    > Also, it bothers
    > that before i 1st formated the disk, in boot up, it shows a message the
    > drive cannot checked because it was formated, a virus or third party
    > software which i disabled before the old disk got failed. I know that
    > is normal, but is there any problem in that?

    Sorry, I didn't follow that sentence at all. Care to rephrase it?

    > Also during virus scan,
    > it says that mbr can't be scanned because it is not present.

    Hmm... sounds like maybe something went wrong in the formatting process.

    > I also get
    > a boot i/o error log commandline virus scanning. Is this a virus
    > problem.

    Well if this is true, it seems that you have found the cause of the
    problem yourself. Clean the virus, reset the CMOS/BIOS, reformat drives
    and start anew.

    > I also installed and
    > tested Linux OS in the previous hd which it might had a virus bcoz of
    > the IT magazines with free cds that i bought that i didn't scanned b4.

    That's another sentence that went on for too long and I just couldn't
    follow. Maybe it's because I've been working on taxes and everywhere I
    look I see W-2 or Schedule X. =P

    Take care of things one at a time. Make sure your system is clean of
    any viruses THEN see if you are having any hardware or driver issues.

    //Kevin
  4. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Any other suggestion?
  5. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    <mel2k3ph@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1114373592.485697.173660@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    > Peter wrote

    >> What motherboard do you have?

    > My mb is kobian(mercury) KOB P4M266. Since its a seagate
    > hd, maybe it does require a seagate hd tool to format the disk.

    Nope.

    > bcoz i used a startup disk to format the new one.

    Thats fine.
  6. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:426c3897$0$79461$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...

    >> I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on it and
    >> someting is not right.

    > There's one problem.

    Nope.

    > If you don't want Windows XP, go back to Windows 98 or 2000.

    No need with a hard drive problem.

    > Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I can't think of any
    > worse commercial OS's.

    Your problem.

    >> The OS kept crashing at all times not loading programs properly.

    > Sounds about right.

    Nope. ME works fine.

    >> Although it boots up normally. I also nitced that in my device manager,
    >> there's an error in "primary ide controller".

    > What's the error message, specifically?

    >> Also, it bothers that before i 1st formated the disk, in boot up, it shows a
    >> message the drive cannot checked because it was formated, a virus or third
    >> party software which i disabled before the old disk got failed. I know that
    >> is normal, but is there any problem in that?

    > Sorry, I didn't follow that sentence at all. Care to rephrase it?

    >> Also during virus scan, it says that mbr can't be scanned because it is not
    >> present.

    > Hmm... sounds like maybe something went wrong in the formatting process.

    Tad unlikely that the mbr isnt present if the drive can be virus scanned.

    >> I also get a boot i/o error log commandline virus scanning. Is this a virus
    >> problem.

    > Well if this is true, it seems that you have found the cause of the problem
    > yourself. Clean the virus, reset the CMOS/BIOS, reformat drives and start
    > anew.

    >> I also installed and tested Linux OS in the previous hd which it might had a
    >> virus bcoz of the IT magazines with free cds that i bought that i didn't
    >> scanned b4.

    > That's another sentence that went on for too long and I just couldn't follow.
    > Maybe it's because I've been working on taxes and everywhere I look I see W-2
    > or Schedule X. =P

    > Take care of things one at a time. Make sure your system is clean of any
    > viruses THEN see if you are having any hardware or driver issues.
  7. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Rod Speed wrote:

    >>>I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on it and
    >>>someting is not right.
    >>There's one problem.
    > Nope.

    Heh, yeah it is. Not related to the hard drive problem, but having a
    shotty OS is *definitely* a problem.

    >>If you don't want Windows XP, go back to Windows 98 or 2000.
    > No need with a hard drive problem.

    After that's corrected, of course.

    >>Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I can't think of any
    >>worse commercial OS's.
    > Your problem.

    No, actually, not my problem. I knew better than to get Win ME.

    >>>The OS kept crashing at all times not loading programs properly.
    >>Sounds about right.
    > Nope. ME works fine.

    Ha! Try working at a help desk for several years and I'd bet your
    opinion would change. Of course, poor users play a part, but ME is less
    stable than Windows XP, 2000, or even 98se. Out of the hundreds of
    tech-minded people I've talked to, you're the first I've heard that
    hasn't agreed whole-heartedly. Or perhaps you'd prefer the opinions on
    CNET (all on 10-point scale):
    (average user rating / editor's rating)
    ME - 4.4 / 6.0
    2K - 7.6 / 8.0
    XP - 6.4 / 8.0

    But hey, if it works for you, go with it.

    //Kevin
  8. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    "Kevin Buffardi" <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:426d972b$0$79455$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    > Rod Speed wrote:
    >
    > >>Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I can't think of
    any
    > >>worse commercial OS's.
    > > Your problem.
    >
    > No, actually, not my problem. I knew better than to get Win ME.
    >
    Most of us have no problems with WinME, but moved to Win2K previously.

    > >>>The OS kept crashing at all times not loading programs properly.
    > >>Sounds about right.
    > > Nope. ME works fine.
    >
    > Ha! Try working at a help desk for several years and I'd bet your
    > opinion would change. Of course, poor users play a part, but ME is less
    > stable than Windows XP, 2000, or even 98se. Out of the hundreds of
    > tech-minded people I've talked to, you're the first I've heard that
    > hasn't agreed whole-heartedly. Or perhaps you'd prefer the opinions on

    > CNET (all on 10-point scale):
    > (average user rating / editor's rating)
    > ME - 4.4 / 6.0
    > 2K - 7.6 / 8.0
    > XP - 6.4 / 8.0
    >
    Meaningless comparision between different families.

    Of 98, 98SE, ME, I would only use ME today if I had an older machine.

    > But hey, if it works for you, go with it.
    >
    > //Kevin
  9. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Eric Gisin wrote:
    > Most of us have no problems with WinME, but moved to Win2K previously.

    Who is "most of us?" I've literally talked to hundreds of people who
    have had serious problems with ME. All of those I convinced to change
    to either 2000 or XP seemed very pleased with the outcome. Unless it
    was due to financial constraints (and no offense intended), I wouldn't
    take a computer technician's advice seriously if he/she said that they
    used ME on their personal machine.

    > Meaningless comparision between different families.

    Well, maybe 2000 vs. ME is a bit of a stretch since they're geared
    towards different audiences, but even XP-Home (which I wouldn't
    recommend either) is a vast improvement over ME.

    > Of 98, 98SE, ME, I would only use ME today if I had an older machine.

    I have 98se as a secondary boot and it has great compatibility with even
    obscure audio hardware that I have. Couldn't say the same for ME.
    Actually, XP had more difficulties setting up the hardware than 98se. I
    didn't even try the said equipment on ME because I wouldn't waste my
    money on ME, but I've heard people with the same hardware having
    problems with ME.

    Again, if you ask me, ME was a *downgrade* from 98se... and *about* at
    par with 95. Heck, I'd rather have Mac OS 9 than ME. This is from my
    personal experience, but as I said before...

    >> hey, if it works for you, go with it.

    But anyways, we're digressing from the point. mel2k3ph@gmail.com, if
    you want to spell out a little more clearly what's wrong, what errors
    you've received, and what you've tried so far, I'd be more than happy to
    give more recommendations. I'm sure the same goes for all the other
    guys in here.

    //Kevin
  10. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    <mel2k3ph@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1114417045.725261.244370@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

    > Any other suggestion?

    Fraid not, like Kevin I found your english hard to comprehend.

    You could try rephrasing it and see if that makes it easier to understand.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Am top-posting because have only one point to make in reference to MS ME.
    In general, ME has 3 major flaws that both consumers and MS MVPs complain
    about. Two of the flaws are not uniform for all. Common to all was the
    lack of built-in boot to pure msdos mode (not a dos window). For those with
    dos-only apps, this was problem.
    Not common to all was the ME installation. Depending on the hardware, a
    bare ME install may not work on some platforms or be extremely difficult
    comparatively speaking. There was also many complaints for those doing a
    98/98SE to ME upgrade, which also seemed to be a hardware installation
    problem. The history of which found no commonality for either one. A bare
    ME install may work, yet an upgrade would not. And, vice versa.

    The newsgroups in general that accepted ME's OS for conversation, had many
    persons making snide and vague remarks about it. Never specific from these
    individuals. Very seldom, was a complaint to be cornered to specfics. When
    valid problems (usually install oriiented), the MVPs were unable to help
    more often than not. Thus many of these jumped on the bandwagon. As did
    many with no experience whatsoever with ME. In 2003/2004, many of these
    MVPs conceded that the problem was not widespread and ME could be made to
    work on the vast majority of systems without any user digress.

    If your apps don't require real mode dos, and ME successfully installs,
    there's not alot to pick at. ME, to a small extent, was an experimental
    step for MS in developing XP. For many, the safest route was 98SE after
    hearing the over-vocal ME complainers. Yet, the percentage with ME install
    problems was actually miniscule.

    The reality check was pretty straightforward here. Never had a problem.
    Both Intel and Via boards were tried. Both Intel and AMD cpus were tried.
    The first one I built, my daughter still has with its original hardware
    configuration with an PQDI 2.0 image backup on an alternate partition. The
    last one I built, I gave to my grandsons just late last year. Am still
    wating for either to break as I'm the tech support guy.
    "Kevin Buffardi" <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:426c3897$0$79461$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    > > I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on
    > > it and someting is not right.
    >
    > There's one problem. If you don't want Windows XP, go back to Windows
    > 98 or 2000. Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I
    > can't think of any worse commercial OS's.
  12. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:426d972b$0$79455$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    > Rod Speed wrote

    >> Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote
    >>> Rod Speed wrote

    >>>> I bought my new HD and replaced it on my old one. I installed WinME on it
    >>>> and someting is not right.

    >>>There's one problem.

    >> Nope.

    > Heh, yeah it is.

    Nope.

    > Not related to the hard drive problem, but having a shotty OS is *definitely*
    > a problem.

    It isnt a shitty OS.

    >>>If you don't want Windows XP, go back to Windows 98 or 2000.

    >> No need with a hard drive problem.

    > After that's corrected, of course.

    >>> Windows ME is the worst operating system since... well, I can't think of any
    >>> worse commercial OS's.

    >> Your problem.

    > No, actually, not my problem.

    Corse it is.

    > I knew better than to get Win ME.

    Wrong again.

    >>>> The OS kept crashing at all times not loading programs properly.

    >>> Sounds about right.

    >> Nope. ME works fine.

    > Ha! Try working at a help desk for several years and I'd bet your opinion
    > would change.

    Nope.

    > Of course, poor users play a part, but ME is less stable than Windows XP,
    > 2000, or even 98se.

    Bullshit with SE and 98.

    > Out of the hundreds of tech-minded people I've talked to, you're the first
    > I've heard that hasn't agreed whole-heartedly.

    You wanna get out more.

    > Or perhaps you'd prefer the opinions on CNET (all on 10-point scale):

    Nope.

    > (average user rating / editor's rating)
    > ME - 4.4 / 6.0
    > 2K - 7.6 / 8.0
    > XP - 6.4 / 8.0

    Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim about SE and 98.

    > But hey, if it works for you, go with it.

    Dont use it anymore thanks.
  13. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    > Nope.

    >>Not related to the hard drive problem, but having a shotty OS is *definitely*
    >>a problem.
    > It isnt a shitty OS.

    Well, I said, "shotty" by misspelling "shoddy." But I'd also disagree
    with your statement. I'd actually go as far as saying *most* Microsoft
    OS's are pretty shoddy, but ME takes the cake of them all. I'm kind of
    dissappointed in their development of the Windows OS. 2000 was a huge
    leap in the right direction. XP was acceptable. Longhorn looks to be
    just another hack attempt to be as "cool" as OS X.

    >>No, actually, not my problem.
    > Corse it is.

    And, not having ME, how is it my problem???

    >>I knew better than to get Win ME.
    > Wrong again.

    Oh, so I did buy ME? Hmm... woulda sworn I didn't.

    >>>>>The OS kept crashing at all times not loading programs properly.
    >>>>Sounds about right.
    >>>Nope. ME works fine.

    That's a really convincing argument and rebuttle. <sarcasm />

    >>Ha! Try working at a help desk for several years and I'd bet your opinion
    >>would change.
    > Nope.

    Seems like you've got the psychic thing down. First you "know" that I
    bought something that I didn't buy, and then you "know" how your opinion
    would be if you had more experience. Oh, and again, strong argument.

    >>Of course, poor users play a part, but ME is less stable than Windows XP,
    >>2000, or even 98se.
    > Bullshit with SE and 98.

    Disagreed. 98 & 98se aren't the most stable OS's in the world, but from
    the years of my experience with all of the windows operating systems 3.1
    to present, ME has been the least reliable.

    >>Out of the hundreds of tech-minded people I've talked to, you're the first
    >>I've heard that hasn't agreed whole-heartedly.
    > You wanna get out more.

    Again, strong rebuttle. I it is an addage to Confucious that says,
    "The man who strikes first admits that his ideas have given out."

    > Irrelevant to your stupid pig ignorant claim about SE and 98.

    Real mature. Grow up.
    So it's irrelevant that not only a survey of other users, but also
    writers in the field agree with me that 2000 and XP are both superior
    OS's? Mmmhmmm. So how is that irrelevant to my claim that ME is an
    inferior OS? Care to provide an argument past "Nope?"

    > Dont use it anymore thanks.

    Good thinking.

    //Kevin
  14. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:426db5c5$0$79457$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
    > Eric Gisin wrote:

    >> Most of us have no problems with WinME, but moved to Win2K previously.

    > Who is "most of us?" I've literally talked to hundreds of people who have had
    > serious problems with ME.

    True of any OS.

    > All of those I convinced to change to either 2000 or XP seemed very pleased
    > with the outcome.

    Separate issue entirely. And thats just as true of SE and 98 too.

    > Unless it was due to financial constraints (and no offense intended), I
    > wouldn't take a computer technician's advice seriously if he/she said that
    > they used ME on their personal machine.

    More fool you. Its perfectly usable if XP isnt feasible for some reason.

    Sure, its got its quirks, but so does every OS, including XP.

    >> Meaningless comparision between different families.

    > Well, maybe 2000 vs. ME is a bit of a stretch since they're geared towards
    > different audiences, but even XP-Home (which I wouldn't recommend either) is a
    > vast improvement over ME.

    Sure, but then so is ME over 98 and 95 in spades.

    >> Of 98, 98SE, ME, I would only use ME today if I had an older machine.

    > I have 98se as a secondary boot and it has great compatibility with even
    > obscure audio hardware that I have. Couldn't say the same for ME.

    Sure, they dropped support for some dinosaur hardware.

    Nothing like your original claim tho.

    XP has dropped support for even more.

    > Actually, XP had more difficulties setting up the hardware than 98se.

    Precisely, because they chose to not support dinosaur hardware.

    > I didn't even try the said equipment on ME because I wouldn't waste my money
    > on ME,

    So you dont actually have any personal experience with it.

    > but I've heard people with the same hardware having problems with ME.

    Sure, they dropped support for some dinosaur hardware. So did XP even more.

    > Again, if you ask me, ME was a *downgrade* from 98se...

    No point in asking you, you never actually used it.

    Those of us who actually used both for years found that
    ME was quite a bit better than SE in a number of areas, in
    spades with the stupid shutdown problem that MS never
    did manage to fix with SE and fixed completely in ME.

    > and *about* at par with 95.

    Again, you aint qualified to say, you never actually used ME.

    > Heck, I'd rather have Mac OS 9 than ME. This is from my personal experience,

    No its not, you never ran ME.

    > but as I said before...

    >>> hey, if it works for you, go with it.

    > But anyways, we're digressing from the point. mel2k3ph@gmail.com, if you want
    > to spell out a little more clearly what's wrong, what errors you've received,
    > and what you've tried so far, I'd be more than happy to give more
    > recommendations. I'm sure the same goes for all the other guys in here.

    I prefer to keep discussions in the newsgroup they started in.
  15. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    > You arent qualified to disagree, you admit you never ran it.

    No, I admitted I never *owned* it. I've used it extensively.

    >>I'm kind of dissappointed in their development of the Windows OS. 2000 was a
    >>huge leap in the right direction. XP was acceptable.
    >
    > It leaves the Win9x/ME family for dead.

    It was a good improvement... but it still has its problems.

    >>Longhorn looks to be just another hack attempt to be as "cool" as OS X.
    >
    > We'll see. Its too early to say yet.

    True - all I've seen are screenshots and some breif reviews. But it
    doesn't look like there will be any big new breakthroughs.

    > You arent qualified to say, you admit you never ran ME.

    Thinking if you repeat this enough times, it might come true? Sorry, it
    won't.

    > Corse not. You didnt 'know better', you just bought the silly
    > storys that you HEARD. You have no personal experience with it.

    Wrong. Did you not hear that I worked on *hundreds* of machines with
    Windows ME on them? I had a Windows machine before ME came out and 98se
    was working for my needs at the time, so there really wasn't any need
    for me to even consider the "upgrade."

    >>and then you "know" how your opinion would be if you had more experience.
    >
    > You dont even know what experience I have had with ME support.

    Then care to enlighten me?

    //Kevin
  16. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Rod, you have quite an issue dealing with any criticism of Windows at
    all. I like Windows for the most part, but just as Lil' Dave, I can
    recognize problems with the OS. I'm puzzled why you're so sold on the
    idea that Windows ME was some flawless system.

    > Like Buffardi who now admits he has never actually used it.

    You're blantantly twisting my words to create a lie. I never *owned*
    it. I *used* it on hundreds of different machines for several years.

    I'm sorry to see that you take criticism of an old operating system so
    personally and resort to personal attacks. For those reasons, I'm done
    with this thread. The point has been made over and over that Windows ME
    has flaws. You can stick your head in the ground and call people names
    all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

    Good day to you sir.

    //Kevin
  17. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:4270374a$0$79460$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...

    >> You arent qualified to disagree, you admit you never ran it.

    > No, I admitted I never *owned* it. I've used it extensively.

    Dont believe you.

    >>> I'm kind of dissappointed in their development of the Windows OS. 2000 was
    >>> a huge leap in the right direction. XP was acceptable.
    >
    >> It leaves the Win9x/ME family for dead.

    > It was a good improvement... but it still has its problems.

    So has ANY OS.

    >>> Longhorn looks to be just another hack attempt to be as "cool" as OS X.

    >> We'll see. Its too early to say yet.

    > True - all I've seen are screenshots and some breif reviews. But it doesn't
    > look like there will be any big new breakthroughs.

    Plenty claimed that about XP at the same stage.

    >> You arent qualified to say, you admit you never ran ME.

    > Thinking if you repeat this enough times, it might come true? Sorry, it
    > won't.

    I dont believe you. Your pig ignorance about ME stands out like dogs balls.

    >> Corse not. You didnt 'know better', you just bought the silly
    >> storys that you HEARD. You have no personal experience with it.

    > Wrong.

    Easy to claim now in a desperate attempt
    to bullshit your way out of your predicament.

    > Did you not hear that I worked on *hundreds* of machines with Windows ME on
    > them?

    Dont believe you.

    > I had a Windows machine before ME came out and 98se was working for my needs
    > at the time, so there really wasn't any need for me to even consider the
    > "upgrade."

    You previously said something completely different.

    You're obviously lying.

    >>> and then you "know" how your opinion would be if you had more experience.

    >> You dont even know what experience I have had with ME support.

    > Then care to enlighten me?

    None of your business.
  18. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

    Kevin Buffardi <kevin.buffardi@email.com> wrote in message
    news:42703898$0$79458$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...

    > Rod, you have quite an issue dealing with any criticism of Windows at all.

    Buffardi, you couldnt bullshit your way out of a wet paper
    bag even if your pathetic excuse for a 'life' depended on it.

    > I like Windows for the most part, but just as Lil' Dave, I can recognize
    > problems with the OS.

    What he said was NOTHING like you pig ignorant diatribe, child.

    > I'm puzzled why you're so sold on the idea that Windows ME was some flawless
    > system.

    Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

    I have never ever said ANY OS is flawless.

    In spades with any OS that attempts a decent level
    of backwards compat with what preceeded it.

    Its not even possible.

    >> Like Buffardi who now admits he has never actually used it.

    > You're blantantly twisting my words to create a lie. I never *owned* it. I
    > *used* it on hundreds of different machines for several years.

    Dont believe you.

    > I'm sorry to see that you take criticism of an old operating system so
    > personally

    Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

    > and resort to personal attacks.

    Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh hypocrite ?

    > For those reasons, I'm done with this thread.

    You're completely irrelevant. Always have been, always will be.

    > The point has been made over and over that Windows ME has flaws.

    So has ANY OS.

    In spades with any OS that attempts a decent level
    of backwards compat with what preceeded it.

    Its not even possible.

    > You can stick your head in the ground and call people names all you want, but
    > it doesn't change the facts.

    You wouldnt know what a fact was if it bit you on your lard arse, child.

    > Good day to you sir.

    Good riddance, cur.
Ask a new question

Read More

Storage