Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Run OS in RAM Speed Trick

Tags:
  • RAM
  • HD
  • Windows
Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
April 16, 2005 6:25:31 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hi all,

(Running OS in RAM is below this Trick for those that have enough RAM to
do it, but if not, there another way to Speed it up by adding a small HD
that I hope will be of help those with small RAMs.)

* OS on a small HD all by itself. *

I you crash a lot and have to format you HD often, try this.

Get a small HD like 4 Gig and set it up as you C:\ Drive and only
install Windows on it, and nothing else.
Install all your other Programs including IE and OE on other Drives (D:,
E, F ect).

Export a copy of your Registry to Disk or one of the other HD's.
Do the same with IE favorites under C:\Windows\Favorates (including all
sub folders) and your NS Bookmarks.

Now if you crash you only have to reinstall your OS and nothing else.
Just import your old Registry, Favorites and Bookmarks.

Saves a lot of work reinstalling of all your other programs and not
having to set them up the way you like them from scratch again or lose Data.

***

* Run OS in RAM Speed Trick *

If you have Gigs of Ram try this.
Programs run in RAM run 1000 times faster than off a HD or CD !!!
How about running your OS there !

The way to do this is with a Ram Drive but the one that comes with
Windows is too small but others make bigger Ram Drives that are not
expensive.

Ram Drive is software to trick your Computer into thinking part of it's
RAM Memory is a Hard Disk Drive.
You must have enough RAM left over to run programs outside the RAM Drive
so you might want to upgrade your RAM Memory.

Once you have a Ram Drive, install Windows on Drive C as normal.
But put IE and OE on another HD.

Then use a Program like Norton's Ghost to Copy your OS to another HD and
Burn it (Windows OS) to CD.
Use your Autoexec.bat and or Config.sys Files load the RAM Drive on
Bootup and Load the OS from the CD to the RAM Drive and Execute Win.exe
on that RAM Drive to run Windows.

Then do your Windows Update and use that Norton Ghost or other program
to Copy the RAM Drive to HD and or Burn that to CD.
You can use you Autoexec or Config to run the Saved OS on the (D:, E,
ect...) HD for those Updates that must be installed alone and rebooted
after.
Install all your Programs then save the OS in RAM Drive to CD and your
on your way.

You'll also have to do this every time you install/uninstall a Program
but you'll also always have a clean OS on Boot even if infected with a
Trojan or Virus.

And the Speed Boost of OS running in RAM has a 4 GHZ Computer run like a
50 GHZ Computer.
Are you a Gammer, do a lot of Multitasking or Audio/Video ?
Then this could be an option for you.

Before shutting down if you want to keep the Reg settings that changed
after the OS is installed you just copy your Registry again and import
it back to Windows in the RAM Drive if you don't want to Burn it to CD.
If you install a new Program you'll want to do this so you can Burn a
new OS CD with the new Registry or just import it when you want to use
that program.

When you reboot you install a Fresh OS each time making it very hard for
a Virus or Trojan to take hold.
You can still get infected by user error but it's much easier to clean
when you cut it out of the OS.

Always use a Firewall and if on a Broad Band Connection get behind a NAT
Router even if you have only one Computer.
It's better than a Software Firewall but I'd still use one with the NAT
anyway.

Hope this is of interest to you.
Good luck.

!:?)
Kevin

More about : run ram speed trick

Anonymous
April 16, 2005 8:46:04 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it. Simply
backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything about
programs or data - if someone follows your advice they will wind up with all
their documents missing and probably a trashed system since the Registry
will contain multiple references to programs that no longer exist.

Tip #2 is similarly flawed ... We refer to this one as the "I didn't have
enough room for an emergency gas tank so I mounted it inside my existing gas
tank. Aren't I smart?"

Combined, these two tips are a recipe for disaster and should be shunned by
all.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
* In fond memory ... Alex, you shall be sorely missed
* http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm



"!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote in message
news:ef4AZGrQFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Hi all,

<snipped as I can't bear to read it again>
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 12:34:30 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Richard G. Harper wrote:
> Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.
> Simply backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything
> about programs or data - if someone follows your advice they will
> wind up with all their documents missing and probably a trashed
> system since the Registry will contain multiple references to
> programs that no longer exist.

Ummm...he *did* say to install programs on a drive other than C: and
reserved C: solely for the OS. Presumably, that means no personal docs
on C:

One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory by
the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Related resources
April 17, 2005 2:39:03 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:ef4AZGrQFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl,
!:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> Hi all,
<snip>

If you're going to go through all of that why not just use something to
clone your drive to the other drive entirely and then no matter what you are
back up and running at the last cloned time in about five minutes? It's not
going to help you speed up your PC at all but it will save you time from
re-installing.

Galen
--
Signature changed for a moment of silence.
Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 11:45:08 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Galen" <galennews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uA%23beavQFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> In news:ef4AZGrQFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl,
> !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
>
> My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
>
> > Hi all,
> <snip>
>
> If you're going to go through all of that why not just use something to
> clone your drive to the other drive entirely and then no matter what you
are
> back up and running at the last cloned time in about five minutes? It's
not
> going to help you speed up your PC at all but it will save you time from
> re-installing.
>
> Galen
> --
> Signature changed for a moment of silence.
> Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
>
>

Clones take a lot of time to do. Do an image backup. Backup and
restoration time with partition imaging software is much faster than
cloning/copying.
April 18, 2005 1:09:59 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:u63KIu0QFHA.2252@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl,
Lil' Dave <spamyourself@virus.net> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> Clones take a lot of time to do. Do an image backup. Backup and
> restoration time with partition imaging software is much faster than
> cloning/copying.

My current system clones (and reverses) an 80 GB drive to an 80 GB drive in
under 10 minutes using Norton Ghost 2k3. (No, the drive isn't completely
full by the way, not even close.) Usually I use partitions but on this
system it's just whole drive cloning. The reason I mention cloning the
entire drive is because an OP can do so for free using this:

clone maxx :
http://www.pcinspector.de/clone-maxx/uk/welcome.htm

I've given that a test run on a couple of systems here and it's actually
fairly nice but does NOT support partition to partition cloning - it only
clones the entire disk I'm afraid.

Galen
--
Signature changed for a moment of silence.
Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
April 18, 2005 7:07:45 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Richard G. Harper wrote:
> Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.

Really, they why not explain how, or you don't know and are just Trolling ?

Simply
> backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything about
> programs or data

WRONG !

You don't know what the Registry is or what it does do you ?
Please think before inserting Foot in Mouth !

Tell me how the OS knows the Path to your Installed Programs and Data !
Lets see,... could it be the REGISTRY ?

The Registry tells the OS WHERE all the Programs are Installed no matter
what HD they are on !
And you say it doesn't do anything about Programs or Data. LOL !!!
They don't have to be on the C:\ drive !

The Favorates are all the sites you visit in IE that would be wiped
because they are on C:\Windows\Favorites.
So if you want to keep em, save em including the Subfolders and Copy
them back to Windows\Favorites.

Combine that with a Defragger like Norton's Speed Disk where you can
tell it to see the OS and it's All it's Drivers Files and Folders First
before anything else and you'll boost it even more with fewer Crashes
and slow downs.

- if someone follows your advice they will wind up with all
> their documents missing and probably a trashed system since the Registry
> will contain multiple references to programs that no longer exist.


Wrong !!!!

Without a Registry you would be right but when you save and Import your
Registry it will know exactly were all your Programs are and they DO EXIST.

I've done that for 15 years on 3 of my own Computers as well as several
Friends and NEVER lost a Program or Data !
And you have fewer Crashes and almost never have to reformat.
Been over 10 years on one Computer !

You install the OS on the Small HD on C:\ and all your other Programs on
D:\, including IE and OE.
Your Registry now points to those Programs that is now STORED on the
other Drives.

Save your Registry and Favorites at this point and wipe (Format) Drive C:\.
C:\ is wiped Clean and all your Programs are Installed on D:\, so at
this point you have installed Programs with NO OS !!!

Import the Registry and copy your Favorites (including Subfolders) and
your back where you started before the Wipe !
Your Registry will still point to your Programs and Data on the other
Drives !
DUH !!! LOL !!!

>
> Tip #2 is similarly flawed ... We refer to this one as the "I didn't have
> enough room for an emergency gas tank so I mounted it inside my existing gas
> tank. Aren't I smart?"
>

Ahh, You can't prove it don't work so attack it without proof LOL !!!
Gammers have been doing that long before Windows so I don't know where
you've been.
We used to load Dos into RAM Drives on Bootup to Speed up the OS and all
the Programs that benifit from that Speed Bost.

> Combined, these two tips are a recipe for disaster and should be shunned by
> all.
>

Details, where are your Details ?
You show you haven't a clue when you said the Registry has nothing to do
with Programs !


!:?)
Kevin
April 18, 2005 7:12:03 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Galen wrote:

> In news:ef4AZGrQFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl,
> !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
>
> My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
>
>
>>Hi all,
>
> <snip>
>
> If you're going to go through all of that why not just use something to
> clone your drive to the other drive entirely and then no matter what you are
> back up and running at the last cloned time in about five minutes? It's not
> going to help you speed up your PC at all but it will save you time from
> re-installing.
>
> Galen

But then you'd still have programs installed on C: with the OS.
Your not getting your Speed Boost then.
And a small C:\ Drive is easier to matain.

!:?)
kevin
April 18, 2005 7:17:25 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:

> Richard G. Harper wrote:
>
>>Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.
>>Simply backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything
>>about programs or data - if someone follows your advice they will
>>wind up with all their documents missing and probably a trashed
>>system since the Registry will contain multiple references to
>>programs that no longer exist.
>
>
> Ummm...he *did* say to install programs on a drive other than C: and
> reserved C: solely for the OS. Presumably, that means no personal docs
> on C:
>
> One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory by
> the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.

Hmmm... Interesting point.
I had thought about Program Files\Common Files but it seems to work fine
without having to back that up.
As for New Hardware, I'm not sure what you mean by new.
If after the Registry is saved then yes but if before then no.

> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico


Glad to get an intelligent Post after that Troll Richard.

!:?)
Kevin
April 18, 2005 7:43:57 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hi Galen,

Your right you could Clone but then you wouldn't get the Speed Boost.

But you could Clone and still put the OS on a Small C: Drive by itself
for easy Maintenance and a Defragger to set Files and Folders First.
This would still give you the Speed Boost and you could use the Clone
that might be faster than reinstalling the OS and Registry.


!:?)
Kevin
April 18, 2005 7:58:06 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hi Lil' Dave,

I had tried this on a partition Drive and it worked ok but you won't get
the Speed Boost it should have unless the running Program is on a
Different Drive and not a partition of the same Drive.
I Posted these because I've used them for years and they work.

Putting the OS in RAM is what we did in the late 70's and early 80's
because with 300 baud Modems you needed to save time where ever you
could and it made the OS more Stable.
Loading Programs and running them in RAM was Common and later Loading
the Dos OS there became Common just before Windows 3.0.

But I also hope to learn something here as there maybe some things that
do not effect the Systems I set up but could with others with Specific
Software and or Hardware that could be exceptions I'm not aware of.

!:?)
Kevin
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:20:11 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:
> Brian A. wrote:
>
>> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@x-mail.net> wrote in message
>> news:eXwYeUuQFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

>>> One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory
>>> by the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.
>
> Never ran into that Problem either and have added new Hardware, saved
> a new Registry and sees it fine.

If the hard/software has stuck an inf or other file some place other
than C:\windows, you may have a problem someday. Granted, not many do
that. But some do...got one inf in C:\

Same thing for apps...some absolutely *insist* on sticking some stuff
some place other than the program directory or C:\windows. I have a
huge, 2.85 GB mapping program on a second hard drive but it also has a
1.51 MB folder of data on C: If I did as you suggest that program
installed on D: wouldn't work properly unless I also saved/restored its
data folder on C:\

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:33:14 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:
> dadiOH wrote:

>> One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory by
>> the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.
>
> Hmmm... Interesting point.
> I had thought about Program Files\Common Files but it seems to work
> fine without having to back that up.
> As for New Hardware, I'm not sure what you mean by new.
> If after the Registry is saved then yes but if before then no.

Hardware anytime. Saving/restoring the registry doesn't put back the
files that the hardware install wrote to windows\(usually)system. If
those files turn up missing - as they will after a fresh install of
windows - nothing will work.

But what you are doing is reinstalling Windows "over the top"; i.e.,
without a format. In that case, there is no reason to save the
registry, favorites, etc. as they aren't touched in that sort of
install. Of course, that sort of install does nothing about any viruses
or other nasties you may have either.


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 8:43:07 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:

> Save your Registry and Favorites at this point and wipe (Format)
> Drive C:\. C:\ is wiped Clean and all your Programs are Installed on
> D:\, so at
> this point you have installed Programs with NO OS !!!

And - whoops - all your hardware drivers are gone. All those that
require drivers other than the generic ones in Windows that is...and
there are many. The format wiped them.
_________________

> Import the Registry and copy your Favorites (including Subfolders) and
> your back where you started before the Wipe !
> Your Registry will still point to your Programs and Data on the other
> Drives !

Also gone are any files written to Windows or elsewhere on C: by those
safely ensconced apps installed on another drive. Wiped in the
format...
_________________

> DUH !!! LOL !!!

DUH indeed...

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
April 18, 2005 9:07:06 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:

> !:?) wrote:
>
>>Brian A. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"dadiOH" <dadiOH@x-mail.net> wrote in message
>>>news:eXwYeUuQFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>
>
>>>>One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory
>>>>by the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.
>>
>>Never ran into that Problem either and have added new Hardware, saved
>>a new Registry and sees it fine.
>
>
> If the hard/software has stuck an inf or other file some place other
> than C:\windows, you may have a problem someday. Granted, not many do
> that. But some do...got one inf in C:\
>
> Same thing for apps...some absolutely *insist* on sticking some stuff
> some place other than the program directory or C:\windows. I have a
> huge, 2.85 GB mapping program on a second hard drive but it also has a
> 1.51 MB folder of data on C: If I did as you suggest that program
> installed on D: wouldn't work properly unless I also saved/restored its
> data folder on C:\
>
> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Hmmm interesting.

The only one I've seen like that has been AOL that for some reason
insists on installing on Drive C:.
And why I won't use AOL on my own PC !

And your right there most be more that do that but I think they are the
few exceptins to the rule I didn't account for.
Most programs give you the option to install on other Drives for all
it's needs and those that don't are rare.

The only Programs I had a problem with are Dos Programs like Trace.bat
to trace IP's, URL's, Domains ect...
That Bat file had to be placed in the Windows Directory and would be
gone after a format.

I just found something that has worked for me and others for years and
hoped it might help others.
Putting the OS on it's own HD solved many problems that reduced crashes
not just of the OS but of running programs.
And a Partitioned Drive is still the same drive so there is little
benifit there.

!:?)
Kevin
April 18, 2005 9:23:53 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:

> !:?) wrote:
>
>>dadiOH wrote:
>
>
>>>One thing he doesn't cover is stuff added to the Windows directory by
>>>the apps installed on another drive. Same for new hardware.
>>
>>Hmmm... Interesting point.
>>I had thought about Program Files\Common Files but it seems to work
>>fine without having to back that up.
>>As for New Hardware, I'm not sure what you mean by new.
>>If after the Registry is saved then yes but if before then no.
>
>
> Hardware anytime. Saving/restoring the registry doesn't put back the
> files that the hardware install wrote to windows\(usually)system. If
> those files turn up missing - as they will after a fresh install of
> windows - nothing will work.

When I first tried this I saved the System and System32 Folders but
found I didn't have to.
Runs fine with what's installed with the OS but I thought the same as
you and thought it shouldn't.

> But what you are doing is reinstalling Windows "over the top"; i.e.,
> without a format. In that case, there is no reason to save the
> registry, favorites, etc. as they aren't touched in that sort of
> install. Of course, that sort of install does nothing about any viruses
> or other nasties you may have either.

No I am doing a COMPLETE FORMAT of the C:\ Drive (No Partitions) and
installing Windows only on Drive C:\ and I.E., OE and other Programs to
D:, E:, or F:.
Using this setup reduces crashes to a point where they are almost a
thing of the past and the Speed Boost as an added bonus.
Microsoft says the Registry is all you have to save but that's not quite
true.

If you run Batch or other Programs from the Windows Directory that don't
come with Windows they will have to be reinstalled or replaced.
Or like AOL that insists on ONLY installing on Drive C: or having a
Folder on C: that you can't change.
Then you have more work to do.

>
> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
>

Thanks for the reply, you brought up some interesting points.

!:?)
Kevin
April 18, 2005 9:36:29 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:

> !:?) wrote:
>
>
>>Save your Registry and Favorites at this point and wipe (Format)
>>Drive C:\. C:\ is wiped Clean and all your Programs are Installed on
>>D:\, so at
>>this point you have installed Programs with NO OS !!!
>
>
> And - whoops - all your hardware drivers are gone. All those that
> require drivers other than the generic ones in Windows that is...and
> there are many. The format wiped them.

Yes.
And the new install of the OS reinstalled new one and that's before I
import the Registry or anything else.
Plug and Play will detect the Hardware.


> _________________
>
>
>>Import the Registry and copy your Favorites (including Subfolders) and
>>your back where you started before the Wipe !
>>Your Registry will still point to your Programs and Data on the other
>>Drives !
>
>
> Also gone are any files written to Windows or elsewhere on C: by those
> safely ensconced apps installed on another drive. Wiped in the
> format...

I don't have or allow any files to be written to Windows or any other
Folder on C:\.
Most Programs give you a choice of which Drives to Install and place
your working Folders on.

There are a rare few that don't and that's why they are rare because no
one like a piece of software telling them where it should install and
where it's working folders should be.
People don't like limitations and is why programs like that are rare.
Forcing Users to do it their way is doomed to fail.
AOL does that and is why I will never use them but I don't know of ANY
other program that does that.
But Dos Batch Programs you place in your Windows Directory will have to
be replaced but not your games or other apps.

> _________________
>
>
>>DUH !!! LOL !!!
>
>
> DUH indeed...
>
Yes indeed....!!!

> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
>
>

!:?)
Kevin
Anonymous
April 18, 2005 11:16:34 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Someday, you will know the difference between trolling and honest critisism.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
* In fond memory ... Alex, you shall be sorely missed
* http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm


"!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote in message
news:%2365BNnERFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Richard G. Harper wrote:
>> Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.
>
> Really, they why not explain how, or you don't know and are just Trolling
> ?
April 19, 2005 1:01:33 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:o CwSmpERFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
!:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> But then you'd still have programs installed on C: with the OS.
> Your not getting your Speed Boost then.
> And a small C:\ Drive is easier to matain.
>
> !:?)
> kevin

Nah, you'd just save countless hours re-installing. (Those hours add up you
know.)

Galen
--
Signature changed for a moment of silence.
Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 1:28:15 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:
> dadiOH wrote:
>
>> !:?) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Save your Registry and Favorites at this point and wipe (Format)
>>> Drive C:\. C:\ is wiped Clean and all your Programs are Installed on
>>> D:\, so at
>>> this point you have installed Programs with NO OS !!!
>>
>>
>> And - whoops - all your hardware drivers are gone. All those that
>> require drivers other than the generic ones in Windows that is...and
>> there are many. The format wiped them.
>
> Yes.
> And the new install of the OS reinstalled new one and that's before I
> import the Registry or anything else.
> Plug and Play will detect the Hardware.

As I said, reinstalling Windows put back the *generic* drivers which are
part and parcel of Windows. It did *not* - and cannot - put back
specialized drivers which are not native to Windows...a USB 2 card, for
example...or an add on IDE card.

It would appear that your mobo has on board everything - if , for
example, you had a separate video card you would have to reinstall it or
be forever stuck in 640 x 480 res, 16 colors.

_________________

>>> Import the Registry and copy your Favorites (including Subfolders)
>>> and your back where you started before the Wipe !
>>> Your Registry will still point to your Programs and Data on the
>>> other Drives !
>>
>>
>> Also gone are any files written to Windows or elsewhere on C: by
>> those safely ensconced apps installed on another drive. Wiped in the
>> format...
>
> I don't have or allow any files to be written to Windows or any other
> Folder on C:\.

Lord, man, are you daft? Disregarding the nearly universal installation
of shortcuts in C:\WINDOWS\Start Menu\Programs, many programs write
files to numerous other folders within Windows. For example, AV and
firewall programs will almost certainly stick numerous libraries in
C:\WINDOWS\system. And there is nothing you can do about it.
______________

> Most Programs give you a choice of which Drives to Install and place
> your working Folders on.

Yes, the program itself. Not dll files that it needs to put in
C:\WINDOWS\system or those or other files in other Windows folders.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 19, 2005 1:32:54 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:

> But I also hope to learn something here as there maybe some things
> that do not effect the Systems I set up but could with others with
> Specific Software and or Hardware that could be exceptions I'm not
> aware of.

Good thinking. If most people do your "programs on another drive, save
reg, format, install OS" thing they are in for a world of grief.

Frankly, I don;t think you are real clear about what is actually *in*
the systems you set up. Or how it got there.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 20, 2005 5:50:37 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:07:45 -0400, "!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote:
>Richard G. Harper wrote:

>> Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.

>Really, they why not explain how, or you don't know and are just Trolling ?

Maybe he doesn't have time to write a book?

>Simply
>> backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything about
>> programs or data

>WRONG !

No, he's right in that while some apps may be OK, not all apps would
be. That is NOT enough to ensure survival after wiping C:

>You don't know what the Registry is or what it does do you ?

The registry is just one of several face huggers that may prevent
programs written for Windows from working when their subdirs are
copied from one system to another. As these face hugger dependencies
force reliance on pre-install forms of the software and makes opiracy
more difficult, don't expect sware vandors to do anything to fix this.

>Tell me how the OS knows the Path to your Installed Programs and Data !
>Lets see,... could it be the REGISTRY ?

The app need a lot more than to "know the path to programs and data",
but since you ask, a number of strategies may be involved:
- registry AppPaths or private reigstry settings
- settings in private .ini files that may be in %WinDir%
- shortcut properties, i.e. "start in..."
- where you last looked for data, remembered in registry
- where you last looked for data, remembered in private files
- by dropping shared files in %WinDir%
- by dropping shared files in Program Files\Common
- by putting the app in the Path (see Config.sys, Autoexec.bat)
- by running bits of itself from startup axis, e.g. StartUp, Win.ini

It you broadened your strategy to include the rest of the settings
files involved in the startup axis, as well as the registry, you'd
improve your odds; include Start Menu, Send To, QuickLaunch and
desktop, the odds would get better.

But there are still private settings files within %WinDir% (uncommon)
and shared code in %WinDir% (or subs thereof) and Program Files, and
that's a common problem with several apps.

>And you say it doesn't do anything about Programs or Data. LOL !!!
>They don't have to be on the C:\ drive !

See above; sometimes program files do, and if you see settings as
data, then settings can be too. Also, some apps store data in
Application Data or Local Settings\Application Data, and those tend to
be on C: as well. This factor becomes bigger for XP-generation apps.

The reason is that most apps duhfault to installing their code in
"C:\Program Files", and certain XP set-ups (best-practice ones too,
that do things like run user accounts with limited rights and use NTFS
as the file system so that permissions can be enforced) don't allow
user accounts to write to "Program Files".

So apps that would have had their "real" data somewhere else but
stored settings (such as where that data is) in files within its own
subtree - thus surviving when you locate that off C: - may now store
the latter stuff within one of the user's "Application Data".

>The Favorates are all the sites you visit in IE that would be wiped
>because they are on C:\Windows\Favorites.
>So if you want to keep em, save em including the Subfolders and Copy
>them back to Windows\Favorites.

There's variability on such locations in Win9x, depending on whether
user profiles are used and are set to allow unique versions of this
stuff on a per-user basis. In which cases, you'd want to preserve the
Profiles subtree under %WinDir% as well.

In XP, this stuff is generally within "Documents and Settings" instead

>Combine that with a Defragger like Norton's Speed Disk where you can
>tell it to see the OS and it's All it's Drivers Files and Folders First
>before anything else and you'll boost it even more with fewer Crashes
>and slow downs.

Defrag doesn't have any bearing on crashes at all, aside from the
minor benefit of reducing the period of critical windows by speeding
things up. It just makes things faster. It has no place in
troubleshooting a flaky system, for another and more serious reason;
as defrag reads and rewrites potentially all files on the volume being
defragged, it's a dangerous activity to attempt on a flaky system.

It's NOT as simple or foolproof as you make out.

I agree with you that there are massive benefits in maintaining a
small C: and keeping data in particular off C:, but the claim that you
can wipe C:, re-assert saved registry and perhaps some settings files,
and not have any impact on anything, is irresponsable. YMMV.

When an app is installed and used, it does a number of things. If the
app is to be preserved as an atomic unit (i.e. "all in one piece")
then all of these things must be presereved. If you slice and dice
those atoms, e.g. by re-asserting settings while losting the files
these settings point to, then things get broken.

Broken atoms are bad news.

>> Tip #2 is similarly flawed ... We refer to this one as the "I didn't have
>> enough room for an emergency gas tank so I mounted it inside my existing gas
>> tank. Aren't I smart?"

>Ahh, You can't prove it don't work so attack it without proof LOL !!!
>Gammers have been doing that long before Windows so I don't know where
>you've been.

Gamers do a lot of strange things for good reasons.


For example, you might think that the faster your modem connects, the
better - and usually, this is true. But a gamer knows that
maintaining a slow connect with no interruptions is far more important
for online real-time gaming (say, online Quake duels) than the speed
of that connection. After all, the only traffic is control info and
the game's status data, not wads of 3D graphics textures etc.

So savvy games will deliberately force the modem to connect at a slow
speed, and one particular speed at that. If that speed cannot be
maintained, then they're dead; the modem may as well disconnect.

The reason is that normally, modems adjust themselves to line
conditions. No errors? Let's try going faster, then. Too many
errors? Let's identify "difficult" parts of the frequency spectrum
and exclude those, even if that slows things down.

When the modems retrain (re-negotiate the connection speed), all data
flow stops for a few seconds - which is a LONG time to be frozen
motionless in the middle of a splatterfest.

Thus the "force modem to connect only at 14400bps" tip.


The point I'm making here is that what works for gamers is not always
a goodstrategy for the rest of us. Gamers are running one big
foreground application, whereas the rest of us tend to run multiple
apps at the same time, as well as other processes underfoot.

So what a gamer might do, is override Windows strategies that try to
make multiple apps run together more efficiently, so that the game
runs at max speed even if everything else virtually stops.

That's great for that particular context, but I wouldn't wave such
approaches as a general cure-all.

>We used to load Dos into RAM Drives on Bootup to Speed up the OS and all
>the Programs that benifit from that Speed Bost.

Sure, because DOS could not access non-contiguous memory and was thus
cramped in the lowermost 640k, thanks to IBM's decision to locate all
the ROMs between 640k and 1M, instead of from address zero upwards as
home computers generally did.

If you didn't go out of your way to use RAM over 1M for something, DOS
would not use it at all - so a combination of RAM disk, Smartdrv cache
and XMS and/or EMS was the hot setup.

Even within DOS, the goalposts changed as DOS evolved towards better
workarounds for IMB's screw-up, culminating in the DPMS system that
allowed games like Doom, Quake etc. to use all RAM as a flat memory
space (something requiring 386 or later processor).



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
April 22, 2005 6:43:39 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Richard G. Harper wrote:

> Someday, you will know the difference between trolling and honest critisism.
>

I do but you don't seem to.
Lets see what we have here.


> Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.

Off to a good start here I see.

> Simply backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything
> about programs or data - if someone follows your advice they will wind
> up with all their documents missing and probably a trashed system
> since the Registry will contain multiple references to programs that
> no longer exist.

Since the whole point was running Multiple Drives that makes no sense.
If I had one HD and only Deleted Windows that would be true but since I
have Multiple HD's and the Registry holds the Paths to all those
Programs on other HD's then they do exist.

> Tip #2 is similarly flawed ... We refer to this one as the "I didn't
> have enough room for an emergency gas tank so I mounted it inside my
> existing gas tank. Aren't I smart?"

Now this is Trollish, if you can't prove it, make something up and end
with "Aren't I smart?".

I guess you only run Windows OS's because other less bloated OS's have
been running the OS in RAM for Decades !
Back in the 70's and 80's we Ran Dos in RAM
Nothing runs faster than RAM, not your HD or CD Rom.
You think Super Computers run their OS off a HD or CD Rom ????

And if you guessed I don't like MS, your right, I don't.
Sloppy unstable OS that has 80 plus errors in 90 plus categories in
every version of Windows since Win95.
Windows don't clean up after itself.

Windows can run well with that many dead Keys pointing to Paths that do
not exist but the more you install and uninstall the more dead Keys you
add that makes the System Unstable.

> Combined, these two tips are a recipe for disaster and should be
> shunned by all.

Honest criticism ???
The first Idea comes from MS about the Registry.
The second is something everyone used to do before Windows when
computers had small RAMs.
Super Computers load the OS and run it in RAM.
So how is this "a recipe for disaster and should be shunned by all".
Do you know what a RAM Drive is and that systems that run them generally
run the OS there?

And lets not forget your last comment below !!!!

> -- Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com * In fond
> memory ... Alex, you shall be sorely missed *
> http://www.aumha.org/alex.htm "!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote in message
> news:ef4AZGrQFHA.3288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

>> Hi all,


> <snipped as I can't bear to read it again>

Nice Signature but in the context of what you wrote above it's Trollish.
Your criticism is not honest because you did not produce any facts in
your so called criticism and instead attacked the writer.

Sounds like the Definition for a Troll to me.

Bye.

!:?)
Kevin
April 22, 2005 6:43:40 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"!:?)" wrote:

[snipped the BS]


> And if you guessed I don't like MS, your right, I don't.

Then in that case why are you here??

> Sounds like the Definition for a Troll to me.

Yes exactly! Couldn't have put it better myself LOL

> Bye.
>
> !:?)
> Kevin
April 22, 2005 9:22:34 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:07:45 -0400, "!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote:
>
>>Richard G. Harper wrote:
>
>
>>>Tip #1 is so full of holes that you could drive a truck through it.
>
>
>>Really, they why not explain how, or you don't know and are just Trolling ?
>
>
> Maybe he doesn't have time to write a book?

And maybe he has to brush up on his social skills !

>
>>Simply
>>
>>>backing up the Registry and your Favorites doesn't do anything about
>>>programs or data
>
>
>>WRONG !
>
>
> No, he's right in that while some apps may be OK, not all apps would
> be. That is NOT enough to ensure survival after wiping C:

In over 15 years and several Computers NEVER had a problem with any
program not running or missing !!!
And I got this Idea from Microsoft's Data Base !

>
>>You don't know what the Registry is or what it does do you ?
>
>
> The registry is just one of several face huggers that may prevent
> programs written for Windows from working when their subdirs are
> copied from one system to another. As these face hugger dependencies
> force reliance on pre-install forms of the software and makes opiracy
> more difficult, don't expect sware vandors to do anything to fix this.
>
>>Tell me how the OS knows the Path to your Installed Programs and Data !
>>Lets see,... could it be the REGISTRY ?
>
>
> The app need a lot more than to "know the path to programs and data",
> but since you ask, a number of strategies may be involved:
> - registry AppPaths or private reigstry settings
> - settings in private .ini files that may be in %WinDir%
> - shortcut properties, i.e. "start in..."

IE and OE is not even on the C: Drive !

> - where you last looked for data, remembered in registry
> - where you last looked for data, remembered in private files
> - by dropping shared files in %WinDir%
> - by dropping shared files in Program Files\Common
> - by putting the app in the Path (see Config.sys, Autoexec.bat)

Only old Dos die hards like me still use a Autoexec and Config.
I maybe the only one that still uses them in a Win9x setup.

> - by running bits of itself from startup axis, e.g. StartUp, Win.ini

I've had NONE of these problems and in fact I had expected the problems
in the Win.Ini and "Program Files\Common" to be a problem but it hasn't.
What's more Windows runs much much more stable on it's own HD.
Of course this is after you fix all those errors in the Registry because
Windows don't clean up after itself.

> It you broadened your strategy to include the rest of the settings
> files involved in the startup axis, as well as the registry, you'd
> improve your odds; include Start Menu, Send To, QuickLaunch and
> desktop, the odds would get better.

What ???
Start Menu is fine and list all the programs installed and run.
No I don't view my Desktop as a Web Page or use Quick Launch.
Send To ?

> But there are still private settings files within %WinDir% (uncommon)
> and shared code in %WinDir% (or subs thereof) and Program Files, and
> that's a common problem with several apps.

Don't seem to need them and have never seen a problem in all this time.

Your Personal settings are gone because you wiped the OS.
But having to set a Window to Full Screen or whatever the first time I
run it isn't a big deal, I can reset them easy enough.

It's a small price to pay if I don't have to reinstall ALL those
Programs that takes HOURS !
The Idea is to give a Speed Boost, reduce Crashes and saving having to
reinstall all your Programs when you have to wipe the C: Drive that only
has the OS and Swapfile on it.

>
>>And you say it doesn't do anything about Programs or Data. LOL !!!
>>They don't have to be on the C:\ drive !
>
>
> See above; sometimes program files do, and if you see settings as
> data, then settings can be too. Also, some apps store data in
> Application Data or Local Settings\Application Data, and those tend to
> be on C: as well. This factor becomes bigger for XP-generation apps.

I don't use AOL or any service or Program that Forces me to install on
Drive C:.
XP, LOL !
I wouldn't own that swiss cheese with all it's holes.
It's a nice OS when they finish with it but they always leave each OS
Version unfinished and go on to the next.

Lets see DCOM is a Hole since 95 when Cobra came out and MS didn't want
to be out done.
On Win9x Boxes this wasn't exploited but in XP with RAW Sockets it's a
whole other ball game.
It was overlooked before but now with XP Boxes that can be used as not
only DNS and Web Servers for Spammers but Attack Boxes for DDoS Zombie
Attacks.

> The reason is that most apps duhfault to installing their code in
> "C:\Program Files", and certain XP set-ups (best-practice ones too,
> that do things like run user accounts with limited rights and use NTFS
> as the file system so that permissions can be enforced) don't allow
> user accounts to write to "Program Files".

Win98se.

> So apps that would have had their "real" data somewhere else but
> stored settings (such as where that data is) in files within its own
> subtree - thus surviving when you locate that off C: - may now store
> the latter stuff within one of the user's "Application Data".
>
>
>>The Favorates are all the sites you visit in IE that would be wiped
>>because they are on C:\Windows\Favorites.
>>So if you want to keep em, save em including the Subfolders and Copy
>>them back to Windows\Favorites.
>
>
> There's variability on such locations in Win9x, depending on whether
> user profiles are used and are set to allow unique versions of this
> stuff on a per-user basis. In which cases, you'd want to preserve the
> Profiles subtree under %WinDir% as well.

Now that's something I didn't think of.
I don't use Profiles and don't think anyone else I know does either.
And that would be harder than putting your settings back the way you had
them.
If it does wipe them that would be a problem.

> In XP, this stuff is generally within "Documents and Settings" instead
>
>
>>Combine that with a Defragger like Norton's Speed Disk where you can
>>tell it to see the OS and it's All it's Drivers Files and Folders First
>>before anything else and you'll boost it even more with fewer Crashes
>>and slow downs.
>
>
> Defrag doesn't have any bearing on crashes at all, aside from the
> minor benefit of reducing the period of critical windows by speeding
> things up. It just makes things faster.

Don't tell that to MS it's in their Data base.
And as far as the "minor benefit of reducing the period of critical
windows" is not by far Minor.
The OS is all by itself on the C: Drive so nothing else is trying to
write from that drive.
Smaller Drive is easier to maintain and the Swapfile don't get Fragmented.
Did I mention I NEVER let windows control the Swapfile?
Put it last on the HD and don't let anything else write in that block.
And defragging where you tell it to put Files and Folders First on the
HD so they are the first things it sees.
Putting your OS and Device Drivers first is not a Minor Benefit.
How else do I blow away a 2 ghz with a 233 mhz playing the same game on
a Network ?

> It has no place in
> troubleshooting a flaky system, for another and more serious reason;
> as defrag reads and rewrites potentially all files on the volume being
> defragged, it's a dangerous activity to attempt on a flaky system.

That's the Problem Windows by itself is a Flaky System.
Do any install of Windows on a New HD and you'll find 80 plus errors in
90 categories right out of the box.
The OS don't clean up after itself.
I can't count the number of systems I installed to check that and I
wasn't the only one to find that out.
And with each version I expected them to fix that but they didn't.
A fellow Ham Kh6hz (Amateur Radio) who was Prof. Computer Science is who
clued me in on the errors.
Where I'm more into the Hardware with some Programming he's more into
Software than Hardware.

> It's NOT as simple or foolproof as you make out.
> I agree with you that there are massive benefits in maintaining a
> small C: and keeping data in particular off C:, but the claim that you
> can wipe C:, re-assert saved registry and perhaps some settings files,
> and not have any impact on anything, is irresponsable. YMMV.

I got it from MS's own Database !!!!

> When an app is installed and used, it does a number of things. If the
> app is to be preserved as an atomic unit (i.e. "all in one piece")
> then all of these things must be presereved. If you slice and dice
> those atoms, e.g. by re-asserting settings while losting the files
> these settings point to, then things get broken.
>
> Broken atoms are bad news.

I got 15 plus years where nothing you've said has ever been a problem.
The only problem close to what you describe is my Dos Tools and Dos
Batch Programs that are not installed but placed in the Windows Directory.

>
>>>Tip #2 is similarly flawed ... We refer to this one as the "I didn't have
>>>enough room for an emergency gas tank so I mounted it inside my existing gas
>>>tank. Aren't I smart?"
>
>
>>Ahh, You can't prove it don't work so attack it without proof LOL !!!
>>Gammers have been doing that long before Windows so I don't know where
>>you've been.
>
>
> Gamers do a lot of strange things for good reasons.

Like running the OS in RAM like they do in Super Computers ?
Bill Gates is a good example of a Gamer.
He played poker here at Brown to put himself through School in Ma.
We had set up an Altear on an Amateur Radio TV Repeater and Bill wanted
to check out the set up.
Computers then had no Monitors, Keyboards or Mice.
It was for the Celestial Observers for a remote TV hookup on a Telescope
they put on the highest point in R.I.
And Microsoft didn't exist yet.

>
> For example, you might think that the faster your modem connects, the
> better - and usually, this is true. But a gamer knows that
> maintaining a slow connect with no interruptions is far more important
> for online real-time gaming (say, online Quake duels) than the speed
> of that connection. After all, the only traffic is control info and
> the game's status data, not wads of 3D graphics textures etc.
>
> So savvy games will deliberately force the modem to connect at a slow
> speed, and one particular speed at that. If that speed cannot be
> maintained, then they're dead; the modem may as well disconnect.

Well that doesn't work that well.
Better setting to faster speed like 115k even though connection is
45.333 in and 33.6 out on Dialup.
But since the change in Modems flash software what you say would work
then but the ISP's and Phone Company now play tricks with your
Connection that would be better at 56k or one setting below.

The Phone Company and ISP's play a trick to slow down the through put of
Data to knock you off if your on too long.
It's like the Backbone Routers are being pinged by a 1000 Zombies with
corrupted syn packets.
It slowly goes deaf and so does your Data.

Good example is Netscape.com Registered to AOL who got sued by 3 State
AG's including my State AG for using Idle Bots on Unlimited Service
Dial-up Accounts.
Well guess what Netscape Internet Service has ? an Idle Bot on Unlimited
Accounts.

I cost the Phone Co here over 50 Mil for charging for local phone calls
from MA and R.I. southgate #'s on the Border.
And that didn't include their Fine.
It's a local call from S. Attleboro, Ma. to Providence R.I. but a new
Phone Prefix for Dial-up ISP's had people running up $1000's and the
Phone Company was well aware of it for over 2 years.

They would refund the first time and refuse to the next time.
Also got them for playing with my Internet connection as I just
described at the same time so I'm not popular with them.
Having a fellow Amateur Radio Operator working for the Phone Company who
gave me the info I needed didn't hurt either.

> The reason is that normally, modems adjust themselves to line
> conditions. No errors? Let's try going faster, then. Too many
> errors? Let's identify "difficult" parts of the frequency spectrum
> and exclude those, even if that slows things down.
>
> When the modems retrain (re-negotiate the connection speed), all data
> flow stops for a few seconds - which is a LONG time to be frozen
> motionless in the middle of a splatterfest.
>
> Thus the "force modem to connect only at 14400bps" tip.

That used to work but now things have changed.
They make more $$$ on Broad Band and figure Dial-up will switch rather
than stay with a terrible service.
I started with a 150 baud modem back in the 70's where the service got
better in the 90's but about 2000 it got worse than before the 80's.

Wow, it's 5 am can hardly see screen here.


>
> The point I'm making here is that what works for gamers is not always
> a goodstrategy for the rest of us. Gamers are running one big
> foreground application, whereas the rest of us tend to run multiple
> apps at the same time, as well as other processes underfoot.

Well yes before 1995 and no after 1995 but today much of the other
Programs like Voice Chat, Game Server and other supporting software are
built into some games.
I a good one for running multiple Apps all the time.
And this is where the 2 suggestions really work.

> So what a gamer might do, is override Windows strategies that try to
> make multiple apps run together more efficiently, so that the game
> runs at max speed even if everything else virtually stops.

Yes some do that but that's not a good way to do it.
The OS MUST have First and Priority Access, then your Display, Sound,
Modem and other Drivers Drivers then the Game.
Last thing you want is the OS waiting behind the Game to send data.
This works for Multi-Tasking or Gaming.

> That's great for that particular context, but I wouldn't wave such
> approaches as a general cure-all.
>
>>We used to load Dos into RAM Drives on Bootup to Speed up the OS and all
>>the Programs that benifit from that Speed Bost.
>
>
> Sure, because DOS could not access non-contiguous memory and was thus
> cramped in the lowermost 640k, thanks to IBM's decision to locate all
> the ROMs between 640k and 1M, instead of from address zero upwards as
> home computers generally did.

NO that's why you use a RAM Drive !
We load Dos into the RAM Drive and it's no where near the 640k to 1 meg
memory area.
Instead of looking at the C:\ HD for the OS it looks at the RAM Drive
for the OS and then runs it into 640k to 1 meg.
Look at the Speed of your HD and then look at the speed of your RAM.
Big difference.
If Programs run faster there what do you think the OS will do ?

> If you didn't go out of your way to use RAM over 1M for something, DOS
> would not use it at all - so a combination of RAM disk, Smartdrv cache
> and XMS and/or EMS was the hot setup.

Your right that's not a bad setup.
Add loading Dos on the RAM Disk and assigning Monichrome Memory in the
Autoexec or Config Files and a few other little tricks is better.

> Even within DOS, the goalposts changed as DOS evolved towards better
> workarounds for IMB's screw-up, culminating in the DPMS system that
> allowed games like Doom, Quake etc. to use all RAM as a flat memory
> space (something requiring 386 or later processor).
>
>
>
>
>>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
>
> Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>
>>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Can't keep eyes open.
Hope I didn't type anything to offend in my Typo's and if I did I'm sorry.
Justb to tired to do the spell check.
Good night, or good morning.

!:?)
Kevin
April 22, 2005 9:27:41 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:

> !:?) wrote:
>
>
>>But I also hope to learn something here as there maybe some things
>>that do not effect the Systems I set up but could with others with
>>Specific Software and or Hardware that could be exceptions I'm not
>>aware of.
>
>
> Good thinking. If most people do your "programs on another drive, save
> reg, format, install OS" thing they are in for a world of grief.
>
> Frankly, I don;t think you are real clear about what is actually *in*
> the systems you set up. Or how it got there.

Worked for over 15 years and still going on several Computers.
Weather built from scratch like my 2 or bought like Compaq or Dell, we
gut the Mfg. Win OS and install REAL MS Windows.
I expected problems like those you suggested but they didn't happen.
And I got the Idea from MICROSOFT !

> --
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
>
>


!:?)
Kevin
April 22, 2005 9:34:09 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Galen wrote:

> In news:o CwSmpERFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
>
> My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
>
>
>>But then you'd still have programs installed on C: with the OS.
>>Your not getting your Speed Boost then.
>>And a small C:\ Drive is easier to matain.
>>
>>!:?)
>>kevin
>
>
> Nah, you'd just save countless hours re-installing. (Those hours add up you
> know.)
>
> Galen

Tell that to the kid door with a 2 ghz Dell I blow away with a old 233
mhz set that way on a Network playing Delta Force.
So internet Lag isn't the problem but Computer Lag is.

When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to open.
Mine taks less than 2.

!:?)
Kevin
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 10:49:19 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote in message
news:ephqL5xRFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Galen wrote:
>
> > In news:o CwSmpERFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
> > !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
> >
> > My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
> >
> >
> >>But then you'd still have programs installed on C: with the OS.
> >>Your not getting your Speed Boost then.
> >>And a small C:\ Drive is easier to matain.
> >>
> >>!:?)
> >>kevin
> >
> >
> > Nah, you'd just save countless hours re-installing. (Those hours add up you
> > know.)
> >
> > Galen
>
> Tell that to the kid door with a 2 ghz Dell I blow away with a old 233
> mhz set that way on a Network playing Delta Force.
> So internet Lag isn't the problem but Computer Lag is.
>
> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to open.
> Mine taks less than 2.
>
> !:?)
> Kevin

Your ideas sound good, in that you have been doing it awhile with relatively few
problems.
Perhaps it would not be good for the general public to try as they are not
computer savy enough to 'fix' any problems that may arise on their particlar
systems.

However, one of the experts in this forum could easily 'actually' try it on one
of their test machines (I'm assuming some of them have one or more) and
report,(c'mon, we all get bored and need something to do).

I do wonder why it takes the 2GHz Dell 6-8 seconds to open My Computer.

Perhaps there is a major problem with that machine.

My machine, 1.8GHz, does that almost instantly and even my old Cel366 at 550MHz
was under a second.
Thanks for an interesting post.
Buffalo
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 12:01:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

LOL! On my Windows XP machine, 1.9 GHz, with 17 partitions on two
internal and two externals HDDs, My Computer opens in well under one
second--it's usually open before I finish lifting my finger from the
mouse button.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS MVP Shell/User
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/cleanboot.htm
http://www.grystmill.com/articles/security.htm

> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to
open.
> Mine taks less than 2.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 2:25:14 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:
> dadiOH wrote:
>> !:?) wrote:

> MS says you only need the Registry and doesn't mention other Backups.

MS is full of it then. Or you misunderstood what they said.
____________________

>> Lord, man, are you daft? Disregarding the nearly universal
>> installation of shortcuts in C:\WINDOWS\Start Menu\Programs, many
>> programs write files to numerous other folders within Windows. For
>> example, AV and firewall programs will almost certainly stick
>> numerous libraries in C:\WINDOWS\system. And there is nothing you
>> can do about it.
>
>
> Shortcuts are not a problem, all reappear and can't think of any that
> don't.

Format = all data on the HDD is gone. Shortcuts, 3rd party drivers.
Everything. Actually, it isn't physically gone but it might as well be
as the OS will no longer have the foggiest idea that it ever existed and
most certainly won't go about reclaiming it.

If you simply re-installed Windows without formating then yes, all would
"reappear". They do that because both they *and* the FAT were never
gone. That is not the case if you actually formated the drive.
____________________

>> Yes, the program itself. Not dll files that it needs to put in
>> C:\WINDOWS\system or those or other files in other Windows folders.
>
> The only time I ran into that problem was with a Dos Batch Program
> that required a DLL that was missing after importing the Registry but
> all the installed Programs did not.

The registry has nothing to do with replacing *files*. Importing one
won't put *any* deleted files back.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 2:35:37 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

!:?) wrote:

> The first Idea comes from MS about the Registry.

Show me.
____________________

> The second is something everyone used to do before Windows when
> computers had small RAMs.
> Super Computers load the OS and run it in RAM.

Where do you think the OS is now? ALL programs run from RAM. Have to.

Or perhaps you are drawing a distinction between running what is
currently needed in RAM and leaving the rest on the HDD til needed vs
loading the lot to RAM? If so, that is silly and I can't imagine any
designer - including those of "Super" computers doing so. Can't say
they don't but there is no reason for it. Any speed increase of doing
that vs overlaying routines as needed would be inconsequential.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 5:35:17 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

98SE Celeron 500MHz
2 hd's:
160GB C: (OS), D: ( Prog files), E: (Dat files) and F: (misc)
60GB G: (98SE images) and H: (XP images)
MyComputer opens instantaneously.

XP Pro PIIII 2.4Ghz
2 hd's:
160GB C: (OS), D: ( Prog files), E: (Dat files), F: (misc) and G: (98SE and XP
images)
160GB H: (98SE/XP images, app cd's), I: (networked XP Pro images) and
J:( networked XP Home images)
MyComputer opens instantaneously on all machines except Home which is an
Emachine (not partitioned).

Creating/restoring images takes much less time than format/reinstall OS. Hell,
it takes much less time than a fresh install, approx 1/2 and that's the entire
drive w/all partitions.

And yes, images are also kept outside of the machines on an external device
and/or media.

--

Brian A. Sesko
{ MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm




"!:?)" <No@Spam.Com> wrote in message
news:ephqL5xRFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Galen wrote:
>
>> In news:o CwSmpERFHA.3788@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>> !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
>>
>> My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:
>>
>>
>>>But then you'd still have programs installed on C: with the OS.
>>>Your not getting your Speed Boost then.
>>>And a small C:\ Drive is easier to matain.
>>>
>>>!:?)
>>>kevin
>>
>>
>> Nah, you'd just save countless hours re-installing. (Those hours add up you
>> know.)
>>
>> Galen
>
> Tell that to the kid door with a 2 ghz Dell I blow away with a old 233 mhz set
> that way on a Network playing Delta Force.
> So internet Lag isn't the problem but Computer Lag is.
>
> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to open.
> Mine taks less than 2.
>
> !:?)
> Kevin
>
>
>
April 22, 2005 8:22:47 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:ukpCAo2RFHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl,
Brian A. <gonefish'n@afarawaylake> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> And yes, images are also kept outside of the machines on an external
> device and/or media.

And I bet that you save far more time with that than you would with any of
these solutions ;) 

Galen
--
Signature changed for a moment of silence.
Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
April 22, 2005 8:42:05 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:ephqL5xRFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
!:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to
> open. Mine taks less than 2.
>
> !:?)
> Kevin

Mayhaps the problem on the neighbor's system is PBKAC or malware? I have no
idea but opening "my computer" here takes a negligable amount of time. A
number of people have given you feedback on this already. They are people
who have more years in front of a PC than most other people on the planet.
They have shown you the problems with your tweaks and cited logical
reasoning for finding your post to be in error. My particular method will
save you hundreds of hours over a few years if you're at all a tweaker.
Beyond that I tweak the OS very little these days and I hardly ever
overclock any longer. My 4 and 6 year old children have AMDs in the 3000 or
better range and while I suppose I could set the tweak to run in RAM it
doesn't provide me with a benefit that's measurable here. I've tried that in
the past and had little luck even when there's 2 GB of RAM installed. To be
frank you should really consider downloading something like regmon and
seeing what is actually going on in the registry during real time
activities. A saved registry is nice if you're going to be making a small
change and then might have to revert to the old one should there be problems
but beyond that I see no viable reasoning for this.

In fact, all that I did see that was logical was the part about using a
software firewall even if you have a NAT setup. That's logical and good
thinking.

I'm not too certain about a claim of doing this over a decade. You used
these same two methods with 95 or 3.1? They were both light OSes but getting
them to run in RAM must have cost you a small fortune in EDO... Not to
mention the price of HDDs back then would have made this a rather expensive
tweak. Finally, and I do mean finally, as long as you feel that this works
for you and that it provides some benefit for you then that's all that
matters. You should be aware that when you cite something of this nature in
a public forum that you'll likely be subjected to people giving you their
opinions in return.

Galen
--
Signature changed for a moment of silence.
Rest well Alex and we'll see you on the other side.
Anonymous
April 22, 2005 9:30:33 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"Galen" <galennews@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:o POEPk3RFHA.204@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> And yes, images are also kept outside of the machines on an external
>> device and/or media.
>
> And I bet that you save far more time with that than you would with any of
> these solutions ;) 

HdblLLhockeysticks YEAH! I just finished imaging an XP drive with over 35GB
total all partitions in < 19mins. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure
restore time if warranted later on. <VBG> To be further on the safer side, I
keep 2 separate images for each machine which I alternate between in case a
problem becomes apparent on the machine being imaged. This way if I find a
glitch, such as Comcasts recent Server leak ( since taken care of, so they
say/it appears ), I could restore back so I could at the very least, test to see
if it is a new issue or was present before the newly created image and then take
the appropriate steps to resolve the issue.

No formatting/installing/copying/pasting involved whatsoever.


--

Brian A. Sesko
{ MS MVP_Shell/User }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 9:31:53 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:42:05 -0400, "Galen" <galennews@gmail.com>
>In news:ephqL5xRFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>!:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:

>> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to
>> open. Mine taks less than 2.

>Mayhaps the problem on the neighbor's system is PBKAC or malware? I have no
>idea but opening "my computer" here takes a negligable amount of time.

This is likely, given that most of Explorer's code set is in memory
already, as Explorer.exe is the shell.

What takes time when starting Explorer is initializing the namespace,
so slow devices, network mappings and other software integrated into
the namespace will impact there.

Then, when contents of a directory are listed, there's further
overhead from remembered (x.y) position info if using the dummy icon
views, going into certain files to draw out icons, av and malware
fiddling with file contents,and other persistent handlers.

All that's gonna hurt.



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Gone to bloggery: http://cquirke.blogspot.com
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
April 25, 2005 7:32:24 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In news:8soo619m4nc2gioqmlpgai055sh6j3qn73@4ax.com,
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> had this to
say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:42:05 -0400, "Galen" <galennews@gmail.com>
>> In news:ephqL5xRFHA.2384@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl,
>> !:?) <No@Spam.Com> had this to say:
>
>>> When he opens my Computer on his Desktop it takes 6 to 8 seconds to
>>> open. Mine taks less than 2.
>
>> Mayhaps the problem on the neighbor's system is PBKAC or malware? I
>> have no idea but opening "my computer" here takes a negligable
>> amount of time.
>
> This is likely, given that most of Explorer's code set is in memory
> already, as Explorer.exe is the shell.
>
> What takes time when starting Explorer is initializing the namespace,
> so slow devices, network mappings and other software integrated into
> the namespace will impact there.
>
> Then, when contents of a directory are listed, there's further
> overhead from remembered (x.y) position info if using the dummy icon
> views, going into certain files to draw out icons, av and malware
> fiddling with file contents,and other persistent handlers.
>
> All that's gonna hurt.

I'd tried to leave a comment at your blog a while back but it deleted it.
Probably because I'm not a member. Anywho, your answers are always so
throrough and full information. You look at things in a very different
light - probably due to being in the trenches for as long as you have. Even
on old slow computers with 98 on them (I was actually playing with an old
233 MHz PII with 256 MB of RAM about an hour ago) Explorer should open
reasonably quickly. If there's a number of running processes, yes
specifically things like full time file scanning for protection reasons but
also others, you're going to suffer slowdown and that slowdown can be
considerable though is nothing compared to a properly gummed up spyware
infested machine.

I wish there was an application that I knew about that would time exactly
how long it took for something to open from the time I clicked the mouse to
the actual time that it was completely open and CPU usage had settled back
down. I'm sure there is somewhere but I don't know where it is and I'm
surely not adept enough to code it. Well... Then again, maybe now that I
think about it... Ah well, I digress... Of course this whole thread is
nothing more than digression but you get the general idea... I don't suppose
you happen to know of such an application?

Galen
--

"My mind rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me
the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am
in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial
stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for
mental exaltation." -- Sherlock Holmes
!