Q: hardware detection and the registry (complicated)

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Need one small problem solved (pick one, any one) and would appriciate any
*helpful* replies. Mostly I've solved my own problem (or rather found an
acceptable workaround) except for the cosmetics of the situation. Here are
my issues:

* I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after automatically
detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not ask you
to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how can I modify
(assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to reboot after installing
a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt. Example: Windows
doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk drive, but it does
prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller. Specifically, I need
it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk controller.

- or -

* I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate to the
previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk controllers!
If I could restrict that, or even restrict the installation of a single
Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that floppy controller) that would be
absolutely ideal.

Why you might ask? Well rather than getting flamed for why, here's a
description of the problem and my workaround. An older system running
Windows XP Pro was installed with the standard pc HAL, and going to ACPI is
not an option (though the bios is supposedly ACPI compliant...) The BIOS
was updated and there are no chipset drivers/patches for this particular ALi
garbage. The client's reasons for the standard pc HAL are none of my
concern, and XP cannot be reinstalled on the system, also not my concern.
Something to do with some custom software. Regardless, the system works
great, except the floppy drive. There are two Floppy Disk Controllers
detected in device manager. With both detected, the machine will not detect
the Floppy Disk Drive itself. Both FDC's fight for the same resources,
which cannot be manually assigned - disabling one (either one) does no good,
as the other still complains the resources aren't available. By
uninstalling either (or both) of the problem FDC's, a rescan for new
hardware finds nothing new. I've been through numerous troubleshooting and
registry crawling in ENUM, checked for phantom devices (i.e. SET
DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES=1) and done many other things, all to no
avail. The simple workaround is to uninstall one ghost controller (either
one) and almost immediately the Floppy Disk Drive is detected and shows up
in My Computer. Sweet. So I through a script in the %allusersprofile%
Startup folder that runs " DEVCON REMOVE @ROOT\*PNP0700\PNPBIOS_12 " to rip
out one of the FDC's at every reboot, allowing windows to detect the actual
FDD which happens in the background with no "new hardware/reboot" prompts -
works like a charm 4/5 reboots on average. The timing is perfect on this
system that the script runs AFTER the hardware detection and BEFORE the
reboot prompt has a chance to rear it's ugly head. Sometimes though, the
timing with windows' hardware detection on startup is off, so the script
could execute WAY after the device is detected, leaving the client with a
reboot prompt for the new hardware (confusing the client, since he didn't
add new hardware, and the floppy disk is in fact working.) I added the
script to the HKLM run key instead of using the startup folder, thinking it
would execute sooner, and it does(!) but in this case, 100% of the time it
is run before the hardware detection on startup, making it pointless, and
the user is left with the reboot prompt AND the FDC screwed up. Right now,
there are multiple users of the system, and getting it through each one of
their heads to NOT restart the computer, because it *MIGHT* ask you to every
4 or 5 times you start it up, isn't an option... wouldn't be very
professional either. So that's the story. Back to helping me solve either
of the two bulleted problems, I would appriciate any help.

Thx again!

 

[Malke]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"John Shaw" <anon> wrote:

> Need one small problem solved (pick one, any one) and would appriciate
> any
> *helpful* replies. Mostly I've solved my own problem (or rather found
> an
> acceptable workaround) except for the cosmetics of the situation.
> Here are my issues:
>
> * I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after
> automatically
> detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not
> ask you to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how
> can I modify (assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to
> reboot after installing
> a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt. Example:
> Windows doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk drive,
> but it does
> prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller. Specifically, I
> need it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk controller.
>
> - or -
>
> * I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
> specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate
> to the previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk
> controllers! If I could restrict that, or even restrict the
> installation of a single Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that
> floppy controller) that would be absolutely ideal.
>
> Why you might ask? Well rather than getting flamed for why, here's a
> description of the problem and my workaround. An older system running
> Windows XP Pro was installed with the standard pc HAL, and going to
> ACPI is
> not an option (though the bios is supposedly ACPI compliant...) The
> BIOS was updated and there are no chipset drivers/patches for this
> particular ALi
> garbage. The client's reasons for the standard pc HAL are none of my
> concern, and XP cannot be reinstalled on the system, also not my
> concern.
> Something to do with some custom software. Regardless, the system
> works
> great, except the floppy drive. There are two Floppy Disk Controllers
> detected in device manager. With both detected, the machine will not
> detect
> the Floppy Disk Drive itself. Both FDC's fight for the same
> resources, which cannot be manually assigned - disabling one (either
> one) does no good,
> as the other still complains the resources aren't available. By
> uninstalling either (or both) of the problem FDC's, a rescan for new
> hardware finds nothing new. I've been through numerous
> troubleshooting and registry crawling in ENUM, checked for phantom
> devices (i.e. SET DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES=1) and done many
> other things, all to no
> avail. The simple workaround is to uninstall one ghost controller
> (either one) and almost immediately the Floppy Disk Drive is detected
> and shows up
> in My Computer. Sweet. So I through a script in the
> %allusersprofile% Startup folder that runs " DEVCON REMOVE
> @ROOT\*PNP0700\PNPBIOS_12 " to rip out one of the FDC's at every
> reboot, allowing windows to detect the actual FDD which happens in the
> background with no "new hardware/reboot" prompts -
> works like a charm 4/5 reboots on average. The timing is perfect on
> this system that the script runs AFTER the hardware detection and
> BEFORE the
> reboot prompt has a chance to rear it's ugly head. Sometimes though,
> the timing with windows' hardware detection on startup is off, so the
> script could execute WAY after the device is detected, leaving the
> client with a reboot prompt for the new hardware (confusing the
> client, since he didn't
> add new hardware, and the floppy disk is in fact working.) I added
> the script to the HKLM run key instead of using the startup folder,
> thinking it would execute sooner, and it does(!) but in this case,
> 100% of the time it is run before the hardware detection on startup,
> making it pointless, and
> the user is left with the reboot prompt AND the FDC screwed up. Right
> now, there are multiple users of the system, and getting it through
> each one of their heads to NOT restart the computer, because it
> *MIGHT* ask you to every 4 or 5 times you start it up, isn't an
> option... wouldn't be very
> professional either. So that's the story. Back to helping me solve
> either of the two bulleted problems, I would appriciate any help.
>
> Thx again!

I'm leaving your very long but interesting post intact instead of
snipping because I don't have a software solution to your problem and
maybe someone else does. But I do have a question - why not open the
computer and completely disable the floppy drive? Is the floppy
actually needed? If it isn't, just unplug it from the motherboard and
disable it in the BIOS. In fact, why not do that and if having a floppy
drive is crucial use a usb external floppy drive instead.

Malke
--
Elephant Boy Computers
www.elephantboycomputers.com
"Don't Panic!"
MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Malke" <invalid@not-real.com> wrote in message
news:unIIXi9aFHA.3132@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> I'm leaving your very long but interesting post intact instead of
> snipping because I don't have a software solution to your problem and
> maybe someone else does. But I do have a question - why not open the
> computer and completely disable the floppy drive? Is the floppy
> actually needed? If it isn't, just unplug it from the motherboard and
> disable it in the BIOS. In fact, why not do that and if having a floppy
> drive is crucial use a usb external floppy drive instead.
>
> Malke

Actually yeah, the floppy is very much needed by the client (I knew I left
something out of the original post) -- a USB FDD solution should do the
trick, but LOL I wouldn't feel very much like a technician if I didn't give
it a try... I suggested a USB FDD as a workaround almost immediately, but
told them I'd give it a go the old fashioned way. Throwing hardware sales
at a problem is so trendy and I hate doing it - what they really need is a
new computer if I went that route; but call me what you will, I've always
been interested in bending Windows' behavior to my will, and in this case
I'm wanting to learn how to make it stop prompting for reboots and/or ignore
new hardware by the device id's... So I'm not as interested in a solution
to the client's problem such as that, as I am in the aquiring the knowledge
to fix what is already there. Call it an issue of pride, but that attitude
keeps the clients coming back, and referring their friends. That, and
the next time something similar happens (hah! yeah right) I'll be able to
fix it right away hehe!

 

[kelly]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

1. Get over it, pride and all. This is the nature of the beast.
2. Isn't wise to any extent of professionalism.
3. That is not the solution.

--

All the Best,
Kelly (MS-MVP)

Troubleshooting Windows XP
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com



"John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
news:uQ3C1P9aFHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Need one small problem solved (pick one, any one) and would appriciate any
> *helpful* replies. Mostly I've solved my own problem (or rather found an
> acceptable workaround) except for the cosmetics of the situation. Here
> are my issues:
>
> * I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after automatically
> detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not ask
> you to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how can I
> modify (assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to reboot after
> installing a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt. Example:
> Windows doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk drive, but
> it does prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller.
> Specifically, I need it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk
> controller.
>
> - or -
>
> * I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
> specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate to
> the previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk
> controllers! If I could restrict that, or even restrict the installation
> of a single Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that floppy controller)
> that would be absolutely ideal.
>
> Why you might ask? Well rather than getting flamed for why, here's a
> description of the problem and my workaround. An older system running
> Windows XP Pro was installed with the standard pc HAL, and going to ACPI
> is not an option (though the bios is supposedly ACPI compliant...) The
> BIOS was updated and there are no chipset drivers/patches for this
> particular ALi garbage. The client's reasons for the standard pc HAL are
> none of my concern, and XP cannot be reinstalled on the system, also not
> my concern. Something to do with some custom software. Regardless, the
> system works great, except the floppy drive. There are two Floppy Disk
> Controllers detected in device manager. With both detected, the machine
> will not detect the Floppy Disk Drive itself. Both FDC's fight for the
> same resources, which cannot be manually assigned - disabling one (either
> one) does no good, as the other still complains the resources aren't
> available. By uninstalling either (or both) of the problem FDC's, a
> rescan for new hardware finds nothing new. I've been through numerous
> troubleshooting and registry crawling in ENUM, checked for phantom devices
> (i.e. SET DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES=1) and done many other things,
> all to no avail. The simple workaround is to uninstall one ghost
> controller (either one) and almost immediately the Floppy Disk Drive is
> detected and shows up in My Computer. Sweet. So I through a script in
> the %allusersprofile% Startup folder that runs " DEVCON REMOVE
> @ROOT\*PNP0700\PNPBIOS_12 " to rip out one of the FDC's at every reboot,
> allowing windows to detect the actual FDD which happens in the background
> with no "new hardware/reboot" prompts - works like a charm 4/5 reboots on
> average. The timing is perfect on this system that the script runs AFTER
> the hardware detection and BEFORE the reboot prompt has a chance to rear
> it's ugly head. Sometimes though, the timing with windows' hardware
> detection on startup is off, so the script could execute WAY after the
> device is detected, leaving the client with a reboot prompt for the new
> hardware (confusing the client, since he didn't add new hardware, and the
> floppy disk is in fact working.) I added the script to the HKLM run key
> instead of using the startup folder, thinking it would execute sooner, and
> it does(!) but in this case, 100% of the time it is run before the
> hardware detection on startup, making it pointless, and the user is left
> with the reboot prompt AND the FDC screwed up. Right now, there are
> multiple users of the system, and getting it through each one of their
> heads to NOT restart the computer, because it *MIGHT* ask you to every 4
> or 5 times you start it up, isn't an option... wouldn't be very
> professional either. So that's the story. Back to helping me solve
> either of the two bulleted problems, I would appriciate any help.
>
> Thx again!
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Hmm, maybe instead of mentioning that helpful posts are appriciated, I
should clarify right now, and make a plea to not get reprimanded by a troll
with nothing useful to add... No offense, but this is exactly why I haven't
really used newsgroups since before the millennium; it's amazing how the
simple problems get help, (though mostly no one bothers to actually *read*
the OP's simple problem and usually post garbage the OP can't use, but I
digress, that's another subject and not related to my situation but when
something gets a little complex and someone doesn't know the answer they get
ill and don't want to help you, or question why you are even seeking an
answer - this I observed several times already in reading through other
posts this newsgroup tonight. As for professionalism, that's something that
I didn't ask for an opinion on, (though you've show me that you wouldn't be
the one to teach it if I ever did ask...)

Perhaps then my question should be simply "Where online can I find some
knowledgable people, who are good natured and willing to share that
knowledge, in order to help me learn something to fix a problem?"

With regards to another's pursuit of knowledge, I *thought* you'd be a
helpful one, considering I recognize your "tweak" site. Honestly I'm
surprised. But yeah, I'm proud that I *try* harder than scam artists and
the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy (or whoever) to find solutions for people, and
during my personal time no less, because I'm intrigued by the situation..
and that pride is nothing I need to "get over."

"Kelly" <kelly@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:%232QphM$aFHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> 1. Get over it, pride and all. This is the nature of the beast.
> 2. Isn't wise to any extent of professionalism.
> 3. That is not the solution.
>
> --
>
> All the Best,
> Kelly (MS-MVP)
>
> Troubleshooting Windows XP
> http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com
>
>
>
> "John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
> news:uQ3C1P9aFHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Need one small problem solved (pick one, any one) and would appriciate
>> any *helpful* replies. Mostly I've solved my own problem (or rather
>> found an acceptable workaround) except for the cosmetics of the
>> situation. Here are my issues:
>>
>> * I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after automatically
>> detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not ask
>> you to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how can I
>> modify (assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to reboot after
>> installing a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt.
>> Example: Windows doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk
>> drive, but it does prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller.
>> Specifically, I need it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk
>> controller.
>>
>> - or -
>>
>> * I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
>> specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate to
>> the previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk
>> controllers! If I could restrict that, or even restrict the installation
>> of a single Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that floppy controller)
>> that would be absolutely ideal.
>>
>> Why you might ask? Well rather than getting flamed for why, here's a
>> description of the problem and my workaround. An older system running
>> Windows XP Pro was installed with the standard pc HAL, and going to ACPI
>> is not an option (though the bios is supposedly ACPI compliant...) The
>> BIOS was updated and there are no chipset drivers/patches for this
>> particular ALi garbage. The client's reasons for the standard pc HAL are
>> none of my concern, and XP cannot be reinstalled on the system, also not
>> my concern. Something to do with some custom software. Regardless, the
>> system works great, except the floppy drive. There are two Floppy Disk
>> Controllers detected in device manager. With both detected, the machine
>> will not detect the Floppy Disk Drive itself. Both FDC's fight for the
>> same resources, which cannot be manually assigned - disabling one (either
>> one) does no good, as the other still complains the resources aren't
>> available. By uninstalling either (or both) of the problem FDC's, a
>> rescan for new hardware finds nothing new. I've been through numerous
>> troubleshooting and registry crawling in ENUM, checked for phantom
>> devices (i.e. SET DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES=1) and done many other
>> things, all to no avail. The simple workaround is to uninstall one ghost
>> controller (either one) and almost immediately the Floppy Disk Drive is
>> detected and shows up in My Computer. Sweet. So I through a script in
>> the %allusersprofile% Startup folder that runs " DEVCON REMOVE
>> @ROOT\*PNP0700\PNPBIOS_12 " to rip out one of the FDC's at every reboot,
>> allowing windows to detect the actual FDD which happens in the background
>> with no "new hardware/reboot" prompts - works like a charm 4/5 reboots on
>> average. The timing is perfect on this system that the script runs AFTER
>> the hardware detection and BEFORE the reboot prompt has a chance to rear
>> it's ugly head. Sometimes though, the timing with windows' hardware
>> detection on startup is off, so the script could execute WAY after the
>> device is detected, leaving the client with a reboot prompt for the new
>> hardware (confusing the client, since he didn't add new hardware, and the
>> floppy disk is in fact working.) I added the script to the HKLM run key
>> instead of using the startup folder, thinking it would execute sooner,
>> and it does(!) but in this case, 100% of the time it is run before the
>> hardware detection on startup, making it pointless, and the user is left
>> with the reboot prompt AND the FDC screwed up. Right now, there are
>> multiple users of the system, and getting it through each one of their
>> heads to NOT restart the computer, because it *MIGHT* ask you to every 4
>> or 5 times you start it up, isn't an option... wouldn't be very
>> professional either. So that's the story. Back to helping me solve
>> either of the two bulleted problems, I would appriciate any help.
>>
>> Thx again!
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
news:uStyJm$aFHA.2996@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hmm, maybe instead of mentioning that helpful posts are appriciated, I
> should clarify right now, and make a plea to not get reprimanded by a
> troll with nothing useful to add... No offense, but this is exactly why I
> haven't really used newsgroups since before the millennium; it's amazing
> how the simple problems get help, (though mostly no one bothers to
> actually *read* the OP's simple problem and usually post garbage the OP
> can't use, but I digress, that's another subject and not related to my
> situation but when something gets a little complex and someone doesn't
> know the answer they get ill and don't want to help you, or question why
> you are even seeking an answer - this I observed several times already in
> reading through other posts this newsgroup tonight. As for
> professionalism, that's something that I didn't ask for an opinion on,
> (though you've show me that you wouldn't be the one to teach it if I ever
> did ask...)
>
> Perhaps then my question should be simply "Where online can I find some
> knowledgable people, who are good natured and willing to share that
> knowledge, in order to help me learn something to fix a problem?"
>
> With regards to another's pursuit of knowledge, I *thought* you'd be a
> helpful one, considering I recognize your "tweak" site. Honestly I'm
> surprised. But yeah, I'm proud that I *try* harder than scam artists and
> the "Geek Squad" at Best Buy (or whoever) to find solutions for people,
> and during my personal time no less, because I'm intrigued by the
> situation.. and that pride is nothing I need to "get over."
>

Please don't take this as a flame. It is advice that you can take or leave
as you see fit. Free advice is often worth what you paid for it.

While the pursuit of knowledge is a worthwhile pursuit you are not treating
your customer in a professional manner. If this application is crucial to
their business allowing them to continue in such a non-standard situation is
not in their best interests. Even if you get the problem fixed by your
method of a registry hack what happens when the computer eventually has a
problem that requires more work or even a new computer? Who but you will be
able to help them? A professional always allows a customer to discontinue
their services if they so desire. That said I have one customer in a similar
situation (not floppy related) but I made sure they understood the folly of
continuing with a non-standard setup and gave them a quote to do it properly
before agreeing to maintain the existing setup. Over the course of time they
have spent more than my original quote, have told me they now appreciate
what I was trying to tell them, and are planning on the necessary upgrades.
I have a satisfied customer who has recommended me to many more clients. I
have heard from other clients that they are also dissing the company that
set up the original non-standard setup.

As for your problem. If possible I would take the computer to my shop for
troubleshooting. It will be a time consuming process involving dismantling
the computer so it is best done off site. Physically remove all hardware
except that needed to boot up. See if the problem still exists. If it does
try to figure what is installed that is acting like a floppy controller and
disable it. If the problem went away add things back in one at a time until
you find the offending hardware. If you still get no joy then you have to
explain to them that their insistence on putting limits on what you do is
causing the problem so they'll have to live with it. If you do find your
desired solution of a registry hack it will cause you more problems in the
future. At some point they will install some new hardware (printer, USB
device, etc.) and then complain when they have to call you in to install it.

To sum up I think your best solution is to explain to them that they can pay
now for a proper solution or keep paying for the forseeable future to keep a
non-standard system running and they will be locked into your services or
they will have to pay someone else to learn the system if you are not
available. That leaves the ball in their court, you look more professional,
and hopefully they will not blame you for future problems.

Kerry




> "Kelly" <kelly@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:%232QphM$aFHA.2688@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> 1. Get over it, pride and all. This is the nature of the beast.
>> 2. Isn't wise to any extent of professionalism.
>> 3. That is not the solution.
>>
>> --
>>
>> All the Best,
>> Kelly (MS-MVP)
>>
>> Troubleshooting Windows XP
>> http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com
>>
>>
>>
>> "John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
>> news:uQ3C1P9aFHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>> Need one small problem solved (pick one, any one) and would appriciate
>>> any *helpful* replies. Mostly I've solved my own problem (or rather
>>> found an acceptable workaround) except for the cosmetics of the
>>> situation. Here are my issues:
>>>
>>> * I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after automatically
>>> detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not ask
>>> you to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how can I
>>> modify (assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to reboot after
>>> installing a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt.
>>> Example: Windows doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk
>>> drive, but it does prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller.
>>> Specifically, I need it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk
>>> controller.
>>>
>>> - or -
>>>
>>> * I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
>>> specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate to
>>> the previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk
>>> controllers! If I could restrict that, or even restrict the installation
>>> of a single Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that floppy controller)
>>> that would be absolutely ideal.
>>>
>>> Why you might ask? Well rather than getting flamed for why, here's a
>>> description of the problem and my workaround. An older system running
>>> Windows XP Pro was installed with the standard pc HAL, and going to ACPI
>>> is not an option (though the bios is supposedly ACPI compliant...) The
>>> BIOS was updated and there are no chipset drivers/patches for this
>>> particular ALi garbage. The client's reasons for the standard pc HAL
>>> are none of my concern, and XP cannot be reinstalled on the system, also
>>> not my concern. Something to do with some custom software. Regardless,
>>> the system works great, except the floppy drive. There are two Floppy
>>> Disk Controllers detected in device manager. With both detected, the
>>> machine will not detect the Floppy Disk Drive itself. Both FDC's fight
>>> for the same resources, which cannot be manually assigned - disabling
>>> one (either one) does no good, as the other still complains the
>>> resources aren't available. By uninstalling either (or both) of the
>>> problem FDC's, a rescan for new hardware finds nothing new. I've been
>>> through numerous troubleshooting and registry crawling in ENUM, checked
>>> for phantom devices (i.e. SET DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES=1) and done
>>> many other things, all to no avail. The simple workaround is to
>>> uninstall one ghost controller (either one) and almost immediately the
>>> Floppy Disk Drive is detected and shows up in My Computer. Sweet. So I
>>> through a script in the %allusersprofile% Startup folder that runs "
>>> DEVCON REMOVE @ROOT\*PNP0700\PNPBIOS_12 " to rip out one of the FDC's at
>>> every reboot, allowing windows to detect the actual FDD which happens in
>>> the background with no "new hardware/reboot" prompts - works like a
>>> charm 4/5 reboots on average. The timing is perfect on this system that
>>> the script runs AFTER the hardware detection and BEFORE the reboot
>>> prompt has a chance to rear it's ugly head. Sometimes though, the
>>> timing with windows' hardware detection on startup is off, so the script
>>> could execute WAY after the device is detected, leaving the client with
>>> a reboot prompt for the new hardware (confusing the client, since he
>>> didn't add new hardware, and the floppy disk is in fact working.) I
>>> added the script to the HKLM run key instead of using the startup
>>> folder, thinking it would execute sooner, and it does(!) but in this
>>> case, 100% of the time it is run before the hardware detection on
>>> startup, making it pointless, and the user is left with the reboot
>>> prompt AND the FDC screwed up. Right now, there are multiple users of
>>> the system, and getting it through each one of their heads to NOT
>>> restart the computer, because it *MIGHT* ask you to every 4 or 5 times
>>> you start it up, isn't an option... wouldn't be very professional
>>> either. So that's the story. Back to helping me solve either of the
>>> two bulleted problems, I would appriciate any help.
>>>
>>> Thx again!
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

> * I need Windows XP Pro to quit asking me to reboot after automatically
> detecting and installing new devices. Some devices windows will not ask
> you to reboot, others it does --- what is the difference, and how can I
> modify (assuming using the registry) it to NOT prompt me to reboot after
> installing a device that it usually DOES give the reboot prompt. Example:
> Windows doesn't prompt to reboot after installing a floppy disk drive, but
> it does prompt you after installing a floppy disk controller.
> Specifically, I need it to NOT ask when installing a new floppy disk
> controller.

This is a simple situation with no answer to your problem. The decision to
reboot or not is based on what the install program requires. If it loads a
driver that must be made resident, or loads a driver that replaces and
existing driver, if you don't reboot, more than likely the new install won't
work. Be aware that in some instances selecting the No option is OK and the
new install works fine. I've seen this often with installing a new mouse,
but you would need to test it.

> - or -

> * I need to completely disable windows from detecting new devices in a
> specific category (not altogether!) -- in this case, as an alternate to
> the previous question, I need windows to NOT detect new floppy disk
> controllers! If I could restrict that, or even restrict the installation
> of a single Hardware ID / Device Instance ID (of that floppy controller)
> that would be absolutely ideal.

Much deleted................

My first question would be WHY are there two FDC's being detected? Do they
have an add-on card with a second FDC on-board that can be disabled? As
long as two are detected, you are SOL.

Have you tried to simply flagged one of these FDC's as "Not used in this
configuration" in the device manager? Essentially this is NOT an XP
problem, but something to do with the hardware. As for the BIOS being
ACPI-compliant, XP requires a later version than the original implementation
of ACPI than your older machine probably supports the original version.
XP's pretty good at detecting an older version of ACPI, and you are correct
that it will not use it.

--
..__
(__
__ )teve www.steve.shattuck.net steve@shattuck.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Steve Shattuck" <steve@shattuck.net> wrote in message
news:O3O7DRDbFHA.3048@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
> My first question would be WHY are there two FDC's being detected? Do
> they have an add-on card with a second FDC on-board that can be disabled?
> As long as two are detected, you are SOL.

Simply put, my assumption for that is related to the mobo/chipset/bios -
amusing as this may be, the old system in question is a Gateway Select
400.... An exaustive google and I found two people in one thread with the
EXACT same issue - One was running - you guessed it - WinXP Pro in Standard
PC mode, on a Gateway Select 400 - the other as I recall also had a GW
Select 400, running Win2K. So yeah, it's not an XP problem, but an NT
compatibility issue with that particular old hardware - which is the reason
why I'm interested in a workaround as opposed to a fix, because I don't
believe one exists or is worth the time to figure out, but I do believe my
particular questions are worthy of some research... Regardless, no add-in
cards are present, all non-essential hardware was removed in my initial
troubleshooting.

> Have you tried to simply flagged one of these FDC's as "Not used in this
> configuration" in the device manager? Essentially this is NOT an XP
> problem, but something to do with the hardware. As for the BIOS being
> ACPI-compliant, XP requires a later version than the original
> implementation of ACPI than your older machine probably supports the
> original version. XP's pretty good at detecting an older version of ACPI,
> and you are correct that it will not use it.

Tried that, but XP still claims the resources are taken by the 2nd
controller. About ACPI, yeah, that was my assumption. :\

thanks!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message
news:eKDJrlDbFHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> "John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
> news:uStyJm$aFHA.2996@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Perhaps then my question should be simply "Where online can I find some
>> knowledgable people, who are good natured and willing to share that
>> knowledge, in order to help me learn something to fix a problem?"
>
> Please don't take this as a flame. It is advice that you can take or leave
> as you see fit. Free advice is often worth what you paid for it.

I agree!

> While the pursuit of knowledge is a worthwhile pursuit you are not
> treating your customer in a professional manner. If this application is
> crucial to

Explain how you can state this without knowing even vaguely how I'm treating
my customers?!? You actually have NO IDEA so I'm failing to see how you can
even comment ... This is OFF TOPIC regardless......

> their business allowing them to continue in such a non-standard situation
> is not in their best interests. Even if you get the problem fixed by your
> method of a registry hack what happens when the computer eventually has a
> problem that requires more work or even a new computer? Who but you will
> be

Off topic. Wrong on the best interests comment; you don't know what their
best interests are, and you shouldn't be able to guess without knowing the
situation. true on the fact that they will need more work soon, and true on
they will (already do, in fact) need a new computer..

> able to help them? A professional always allows a customer to discontinue
> their services if they so desire. That said I have one customer in a
> similar

Are you incinuating something, *again* without knowing what you're talking
about? I think so. You have no idea the lengths I go through to keep
detailed records of the problem, the solution (or in this rare case the
workaround,) and my recommendations if they differ from what the client
actually wants done; in addition to creating an easy and clearly documented
UNDO for the workaround. Copies of every note I make are printed directly
on a final Invoice and given to the customer; they are also made available
to them in the future if we've still got them in our POS. We warantee our
labor, and in my line of work a customer *could* call back with issues in as
little as a week's time, and with as many systems as I work on, by then I
would have forgotten them and their situation almost entirely - or they
could be talking to a co-worker, who would need a detailed record of what is
going on, especially if I'm not there or can't be disturbed. So yes, this
level of detail is not hindering a client in any way if they want to go to a
3rd party for future work.... and even if the client lost their invoice and
a 3rd party tech shop called us directly to find out what was done, we would
communicate there as well, provided we have the client's consent. But
again, you're grabbing at assumptions, and quite frankly I think you're
insulting me on purpose. Also, you're still OT.

> situation (not floppy related) but I made sure they understood the folly
> of continuing with a non-standard setup and gave them a quote to do it
> properly before agreeing to maintain the existing setup. Over the course
> of time they

Are you saying that I didn't? Well, there you go again with incinuations
based on your ignorance of my situation. If I didn't make it clear enough
already that I have had this talk with my client and that my recommendations
differ from what I'm actually trying to do, then I may have failed to
mention that BECAUSE IT IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS CONVERSATION?! But let it be
known! Frankly, if we're discussing professionalism here (which we should
not be doing btw,) then I'm doing just fine by not discussing my client's
personal hardships and issues openly in a public forum. All you need to
know is that I am going the extra mile for them, on my own time, which is
something I do not have to do, because they asked me to. Actually, you
don't even need to know that, so why is it an issue with you? this isn't
alt.tech.professionalism.troll or wherever you think I may have cross
posted...

> have spent more than my original quote, have told me they now appreciate
> what I was trying to tell them, and are planning on the necessary
> upgrades. I have a satisfied customer who has recommended me to many more
> clients. I have heard from other clients that they are also dissing the
> company that set up the original non-standard setup.

We're so Off-T we might as well call it On-T but now I'm in the mood to let
you in on a little secret ... perhaps the company that did the non-standard
setup in the first place recommended against it, but offered it as an option
to the client, whether it was a good decision to do so or not.. Yes now the
client is "dissing" that company since you came along and sold them some
hardware. Great! Except that if you've been in any similar business for a
while, you'll realize that the same client could have been sold hardware
first and had a 2nd opinion later on (especially if something goes wrong
with that new hardware, just as it could with the non-standard resolution.)
When the client gets that second opinion he/she could easily be "dissing"
you for throwing hardware at the problem and recommending clients avoid you!

My own real life example is a guy I remember from a month or more ago, came
in and insisted we couldn't fix his problem. Told us that 3 other shops had
spent untold amounts of time on it, they all formatted the system and
reinstalled everything (or nothing,) tried new and old drivers, bios
flashes, etc. and they all wanted to replace parts. The client was
perfectly happy with his old system and didn't want to replace parts as it
worked perfect for him in every other way. I assured him we would give a
sound (4th) opinion *if* parts replacement was needed, but that we would
definately fix his issue (or find the cause) of intermittent and varing blue
screens during shutdown. A co-worker had the system for some time, as
intermittent issues often go, but tracked doen the problem - or at least the
trigger to make the problem consistent, which was that after any screen
saver was active the issue occurred. Well, solution aside, the point is the
client came in talking trash about others trying to push hardware on him
when it wasn't needed to solve his problem - that simply disabling his
screen saver fixed the issue. The key to professionalism here, was not to
talk bad about the other tech shops and not to agree with the client talking
bad about them. On that alone, we could NOT have looked bad no matter what
the outcome. Though luckily for the other tech shops, we were able to
pinpoint the problem, so he quit "dissing" the other tech shops. We made
our recommendations on exactly what to replace if the client so chose... we
gave him the option. Because we were the one to GIVE him all the options,
he's OUR customer now...

Now my client, whose problem prompted me to post here, was referred to us by
another client BECAUSE we go the extra mile, and we give them all the
options before making our recommendations. That's a little flattering in
and of itself.

You see, when playing the PC Doctor, Auto Mechanic, Heart Surgeon, or
whatever -- you have a choice to give the client the BEST option, or all
options where they exist, and based on their situation. What happens with
your client from there depends on the person.... to some it's important to
know options exist but will still go with your strong recommendation - this
works out if they get that 2nd opinion elsewhere and find that there were
other possibilities that you didn't tell them about either because you
aren't good at what you do and therefore didn't know any better, or because
you were just trying to push sales. That makes you look very bad, even if
you did resolve their problem - further, that 2nd opinion could come from
some idiot competition that insists there would be no downside to that
non-standard workaround - the client will never know, (and my loose trust in
you) not having heard it from you first. It is true for some people that
they will go for your non-standard options for whatever reason, regardless
of how much you recommend against it. That is not your problem when the
decision is made; what is, is making it work as best as possible and making
them understand the risks. Then you're covered. In the situation you
described, it could have easily went the other way, and you must see that.

> As for your problem. If possible I would take the computer to my shop for

Ahh, finally On Topic! Your shop? Ok, maybe it if was you....

> troubleshooting. It will be a time consuming process involving dismantling
> the computer so it is best done off site. Physically remove all hardware
> except that needed to boot up. See if the problem still exists. If it does
> try to figure what is installed that is acting like a floppy controller
> and disable it. If the problem went away add things back in one at a time
> until you find the offending hardware. If you still get no joy then you
> have to

I didn't realize I needed to inform you that I happen to know what I'm
doing. I can tell you though, that I found out the problem fairly quickly,
realized that a workaround was the best route (to provide another option to
my client, on her request) without replacing hardware. The "quick and
dirty" cause of the problem can be read in my reply to Steve Shattuck. It's
quite amusing, actually.

> explain to them that their insistence on putting limits on what you do is
> causing the problem so they'll have to live with it. If you do find your

Already done.

> desired solution of a registry hack it will cause you more problems in the
> future. At some point they will install some new hardware (printer, USB
> device, etc.) and then complain when they have to call you in to install
> it.

This shouldn't be an issue if I can just get the answers I seek. Modifying
a hex bit in a registry setting telling the system to not prompt for a
reboot after installing an FDC (giving it the same behavior as if it were
installing an FDD) ((or even making windows not detect new FDC's)) will not
have an effect on the client's desire to install other new hardware unless
it's a FDC... The odds of that are astounding except in the case of a mobo
swap which will pretty much mean a new computer considering their hardware,
which means that any work done to their system now won't even matter at that
point...... it will be an almost perfect workaround if it's possible... and
I know it is, just gotta find the right way to do it, by getting the right
minds on the case. Sounds like a lot of work, but I go that extra mile for
my clients, my employers, and my own pursuit of knowledge - though that need
not be justified to a newsgroup.

> To sum up I think your best solution is to explain to them that they can
> pay now for a proper solution or keep paying for the forseeable future to
> keep a non-standard system running and they will be locked into your
> services or

Not entirely true, if you understand the scope of the situation.... but
again how could you be, this isn't *your* customer so you aren't privy to
their specific needs - please don't pretend that you are.

> they will have to pay someone else to learn the system if you are not

Definately not true with me and mine, as I explained earlier; I don't work
like your average tech and that's where my pride resides. Say what you will
about it, but it's all OT for my requests.

> available. That leaves the ball in their court, you look more
> professional, and hopefully they will not blame you for future problems.

You got it! That's the idea! I realize you didn't mean to flame, but I
think you're just good at the subtleties (or don't realize it.) I know I
threw some of that condescending tone right back at ya - but you asked for
it. Depending on my mood and my free time, I can easily baited, and that's
my downfall - and Kerry, take with you that your post wasn't what set me off
the most, but the baiting was successful - any further communication I would
hope is strictly about making progress in the hopes of answering my
questions; they may be my pride, but the pride of others so far isn't at all
about solving problems, it seems to be about boosting ego's. If that is
your bag, then make yourselves look better by using your knowledge and not
your poorly formulated opinions.

But above all Kerry, understand that my attitude isn't directed solely at
you, so try not to take much (if any) offense, nor should you get too
flattered that I wasted my time explaining all this on your account - this
is simply not true. This is directed at the general condescending (and
inapplicable) replies I've received and will receive.... and unfortunately I
now believe it's in my best interests to not bother with continuing this
[now] pointless thread or ever starting a new one in this venue because of
the reactions I will get; excluding of course Elephantboy Malke, since he
was surprisingly the most helpful (reminding me of some bit of info that I
forgot to include in the original post, that the floppy was actually needed
by my client, though the USB-FDD suggestion is not helpful to my specific
situation considering certain circumstances.) Good job Malke, you left your
attitude checked at the door, and genuinely tried to help ... I am starting
to think that yours was the best reply I probably could expect to receive in
this forum :\ (or any?) Much to the relief of some of you, I will consider
taking my run-on sentences and genuine desire to learn and share knowledge
elsewhere in the future. Thanks anyway!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I guess you didn't read the first line of my post. I put it there so if you
didn't want to read some free advice you didn't have to. Your OP made it
clear you were looking for a fix not advice. I should have added OT to the
subject. I still say a registry hack may have unintended consequences and is
not the best solution. It sounds like you already know this and have made
your client aware of this fact. What you didn't do was make us aware of the
fact. Your OP sounded like you were looking for a quick fix and weren't too
worried about the consequences. That type of attitude (not yours as I've
found out) gives the whole industry a bad name. Too often I have seen
clients hosed when a consultant sets up a proprietary system to lock them
into using them as their only supplier. If you re-read your OP with an open
mind you'll see the attitude I misread into it.

Kerry

"John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
news:%23CzDaUJbFHA.2696@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message
> news:eKDJrlDbFHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> "John Shaw" <anon> wrote in message
>> news:uStyJm$aFHA.2996@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>> Perhaps then my question should be simply "Where online can I find some
>>> knowledgable people, who are good natured and willing to share that
>>> knowledge, in order to help me learn something to fix a problem?"
>>
>> Please don't take this as a flame. It is advice that you can take or
>> leave as you see fit. Free advice is often worth what you paid for it.
>
> I agree!
>
>> While the pursuit of knowledge is a worthwhile pursuit you are not
>> treating your customer in a professional manner. If this application is
>> crucial to
>
> Explain how you can state this without knowing even vaguely how I'm
> treating my customers?!? You actually have NO IDEA so I'm failing to see
> how you can even comment ... This is OFF TOPIC regardless......
>
>> their business allowing them to continue in such a non-standard situation
>> is not in their best interests. Even if you get the problem fixed by your
>> method of a registry hack what happens when the computer eventually has a
>> problem that requires more work or even a new computer? Who but you will
>> be
>
> Off topic. Wrong on the best interests comment; you don't know what their
> best interests are, and you shouldn't be able to guess without knowing the
> situation. true on the fact that they will need more work soon, and true
> on they will (already do, in fact) need a new computer..
>
>> able to help them? A professional always allows a customer to discontinue
>> their services if they so desire. That said I have one customer in a
>> similar
>
> Are you incinuating something, *again* without knowing what you're talking
> about? I think so. You have no idea the lengths I go through to keep
> detailed records of the problem, the solution (or in this rare case the
> workaround,) and my recommendations if they differ from what the client
> actually wants done; in addition to creating an easy and clearly
> documented UNDO for the workaround. Copies of every note I make are
> printed directly on a final Invoice and given to the customer; they are
> also made available to them in the future if we've still got them in our
> POS. We warantee our labor, and in my line of work a customer *could*
> call back with issues in as little as a week's time, and with as many
> systems as I work on, by then I would have forgotten them and their
> situation almost entirely - or they could be talking to a co-worker, who
> would need a detailed record of what is going on, especially if I'm not
> there or can't be disturbed. So yes, this level of detail is not
> hindering a client in any way if they want to go to a 3rd party for future
> work.... and even if the client lost their invoice and a 3rd party tech
> shop called us directly to find out what was done, we would communicate
> there as well, provided we have the client's consent. But again, you're
> grabbing at assumptions, and quite frankly I think you're insulting me on
> purpose. Also, you're still OT.
>
>> situation (not floppy related) but I made sure they understood the folly
>> of continuing with a non-standard setup and gave them a quote to do it
>> properly before agreeing to maintain the existing setup. Over the course
>> of time they
>
> Are you saying that I didn't? Well, there you go again with incinuations
> based on your ignorance of my situation. If I didn't make it clear enough
> already that I have had this talk with my client and that my
> recommendations differ from what I'm actually trying to do, then I may
> have failed to mention that BECAUSE IT IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS
> CONVERSATION?! But let it be known! Frankly, if we're discussing
> professionalism here (which we should not be doing btw,) then I'm doing
> just fine by not discussing my client's personal hardships and issues
> openly in a public forum. All you need to know is that I am going the
> extra mile for them, on my own time, which is something I do not have to
> do, because they asked me to. Actually, you don't even need to know that,
> so why is it an issue with you? this isn't alt.tech.professionalism.troll
> or wherever you think I may have cross posted...
>
>> have spent more than my original quote, have told me they now appreciate
>> what I was trying to tell them, and are planning on the necessary
>> upgrades. I have a satisfied customer who has recommended me to many more
>> clients. I have heard from other clients that they are also dissing the
>> company that set up the original non-standard setup.
>
> We're so Off-T we might as well call it On-T but now I'm in the mood to
> let you in on a little secret ... perhaps the company that did the
> non-standard setup in the first place recommended against it, but offered
> it as an option to the client, whether it was a good decision to do so or
> not.. Yes now the client is "dissing" that company since you came along
> and sold them some hardware. Great! Except that if you've been in any
> similar business for a while, you'll realize that the same client could
> have been sold hardware first and had a 2nd opinion later on (especially
> if something goes wrong with that new hardware, just as it could with the
> non-standard resolution.) When the client gets that second opinion he/she
> could easily be "dissing" you for throwing hardware at the problem and
> recommending clients avoid you!
>
> My own real life example is a guy I remember from a month or more ago,
> came in and insisted we couldn't fix his problem. Told us that 3 other
> shops had spent untold amounts of time on it, they all formatted the
> system and reinstalled everything (or nothing,) tried new and old drivers,
> bios flashes, etc. and they all wanted to replace parts. The client was
> perfectly happy with his old system and didn't want to replace parts as it
> worked perfect for him in every other way. I assured him we would give a
> sound (4th) opinion *if* parts replacement was needed, but that we would
> definately fix his issue (or find the cause) of intermittent and varing
> blue screens during shutdown. A co-worker had the system for some time,
> as intermittent issues often go, but tracked doen the problem - or at
> least the trigger to make the problem consistent, which was that after any
> screen saver was active the issue occurred. Well, solution aside, the
> point is the client came in talking trash about others trying to push
> hardware on him when it wasn't needed to solve his problem - that simply
> disabling his screen saver fixed the issue. The key to professionalism
> here, was not to talk bad about the other tech shops and not to agree with
> the client talking bad about them. On that alone, we could NOT have
> looked bad no matter what the outcome. Though luckily for the other tech
> shops, we were able to pinpoint the problem, so he quit "dissing" the
> other tech shops. We made our recommendations on exactly what to replace
> if the client so chose... we gave him the option. Because we were the one
> to GIVE him all the options, he's OUR customer now...
>
> Now my client, whose problem prompted me to post here, was referred to us
> by another client BECAUSE we go the extra mile, and we give them all the
> options before making our recommendations. That's a little flattering in
> and of itself.
>
> You see, when playing the PC Doctor, Auto Mechanic, Heart Surgeon, or
> whatever -- you have a choice to give the client the BEST option, or all
> options where they exist, and based on their situation. What happens with
> your client from there depends on the person.... to some it's important to
> know options exist but will still go with your strong recommendation -
> this works out if they get that 2nd opinion elsewhere and find that there
> were other possibilities that you didn't tell them about either because
> you aren't good at what you do and therefore didn't know any better, or
> because you were just trying to push sales. That makes you look very bad,
> even if you did resolve their problem - further, that 2nd opinion could
> come from some idiot competition that insists there would be no downside
> to that non-standard workaround - the client will never know, (and my
> loose trust in you) not having heard it from you first. It is true for
> some people that they will go for your non-standard options for whatever
> reason, regardless of how much you recommend against it. That is not your
> problem when the decision is made; what is, is making it work as best as
> possible and making them understand the risks. Then you're covered. In
> the situation you described, it could have easily went the other way, and
> you must see that.
>
>> As for your problem. If possible I would take the computer to my shop for
>
> Ahh, finally On Topic! Your shop? Ok, maybe it if was you....
>
>> troubleshooting. It will be a time consuming process involving
>> dismantling the computer so it is best done off site. Physically remove
>> all hardware except that needed to boot up. See if the problem still
>> exists. If it does try to figure what is installed that is acting like a
>> floppy controller and disable it. If the problem went away add things
>> back in one at a time until you find the offending hardware. If you still
>> get no joy then you have to
>
> I didn't realize I needed to inform you that I happen to know what I'm
> doing. I can tell you though, that I found out the problem fairly
> quickly, realized that a workaround was the best route (to provide another
> option to my client, on her request) without replacing hardware. The
> "quick and dirty" cause of the problem can be read in my reply to Steve
> Shattuck. It's quite amusing, actually.
>
>> explain to them that their insistence on putting limits on what you do is
>> causing the problem so they'll have to live with it. If you do find your
>
> Already done.
>
>> desired solution of a registry hack it will cause you more problems in
>> the future. At some point they will install some new hardware (printer,
>> USB device, etc.) and then complain when they have to call you in to
>> install it.
>
> This shouldn't be an issue if I can just get the answers I seek.
> Modifying a hex bit in a registry setting telling the system to not prompt
> for a reboot after installing an FDC (giving it the same behavior as if it
> were installing an FDD) ((or even making windows not detect new FDC's))
> will not have an effect on the client's desire to install other new
> hardware unless it's a FDC... The odds of that are astounding except in
> the case of a mobo swap which will pretty much mean a new computer
> considering their hardware, which means that any work done to their system
> now won't even matter at that point...... it will be an almost perfect
> workaround if it's possible... and I know it is, just gotta find the right
> way to do it, by getting the right minds on the case. Sounds like a lot
> of work, but I go that extra mile for my clients, my employers, and my own
> pursuit of knowledge - though that need not be justified to a newsgroup.
>
>> To sum up I think your best solution is to explain to them that they can
>> pay now for a proper solution or keep paying for the forseeable future to
>> keep a non-standard system running and they will be locked into your
>> services or
>
> Not entirely true, if you understand the scope of the situation.... but
> again how could you be, this isn't *your* customer so you aren't privy to
> their specific needs - please don't pretend that you are.
>
>> they will have to pay someone else to learn the system if you are not
>
> Definately not true with me and mine, as I explained earlier; I don't work
> like your average tech and that's where my pride resides. Say what you
> will about it, but it's all OT for my requests.
>
>> available. That leaves the ball in their court, you look more
>> professional, and hopefully they will not blame you for future problems.
>
> You got it! That's the idea! I realize you didn't mean to flame, but I
> think you're just good at the subtleties (or don't realize it.) I know I
> threw some of that condescending tone right back at ya - but you asked for
> it. Depending on my mood and my free time, I can easily baited, and
> that's my downfall - and Kerry, take with you that your post wasn't what
> set me off the most, but the baiting was successful - any further
> communication I would hope is strictly about making progress in the hopes
> of answering my questions; they may be my pride, but the pride of others
> so far isn't at all about solving problems, it seems to be about boosting
> ego's. If that is your bag, then make yourselves look better by using
> your knowledge and not your poorly formulated opinions.
>
> But above all Kerry, understand that my attitude isn't directed solely at
> you, so try not to take much (if any) offense, nor should you get too
> flattered that I wasted my time explaining all this on your account - this
> is simply not true. This is directed at the general condescending (and
> inapplicable) replies I've received and will receive.... and unfortunately
> I now believe it's in my best interests to not bother with continuing this
> [now] pointless thread or ever starting a new one in this venue because of
> the reactions I will get; excluding of course Elephantboy Malke, since he
> was surprisingly the most helpful (reminding me of some bit of info that I
> forgot to include in the original post, that the floppy was actually
> needed by my client, though the USB-FDD suggestion is not helpful to my
> specific situation considering certain circumstances.) Good job Malke,
> you left your attitude checked at the door, and genuinely tried to help
> ... I am starting to think that yours was the best reply I probably could
> expect to receive in this forum :\ (or any?) Much to the relief of some
> of you, I will consider taking my run-on sentences and genuine desire to
> learn and share knowledge elsewhere in the future. Thanks anyway!
>