[Ham-Computers] Sick 'Pooter'

[Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC)]

gene wrote:
> Hylton:
> Thank you for the reply!
Sri for the late reply. I haven't checked my [Ham-Computers] email for a 
while.
> I have used the Maxtor disk to format the drive and also have used the windows boot disk; doing the usual fdisk, sys, etc.
PLEASE investigate setting your email program to wrap long lines at 72 
characters.

I am glad to see you are using fdisk. It is the option I would have gone 
for to delete all the partitions on the harddrive and then to recreate 
the partitions you need.

Do not use the 'sys' command as that puts something like a Windows 
bootable system on your harddisk. I have to google for it, but in all 
honesty I have never needed it.

Once you have created the partitions you need, and exited back to the C: 
prompt, put the Windows CD in the CD-drive and restart the machine. If 
the pooter is the newer type the CD-ROM should be bootable and therefore 
will start as it will boot from the CD and give you the first 
installation screen. From there I am pretty sure you will be OK.

> I have removed all of the add-in ISA cards, used a AGP and a ISA video card, changed RAM sticks (Or, maybe I should say modules).
Why? Your original email said the computer locked up. It might have been 
hardware related, personally though I think it is because the 'pride of 
Redmond'/Windows software you are using hiccuped.

> Another note: I have tried three different HDD's, mice, monitors and keyboards - all with the same results: I am unable to load ANY version of Windows ('98, '98SE, WINME, XP Home and XP Pro). Did not try Win2K or NT.
More and more it is looking like a software error.

> I AM able to load and use any DOS-Based program(s) with no problems.
Because DOS doesn't try and control the hardware like Windows does, it 
just accepts what it has and works with it.

> So, I took all of the cards and put them into a different COMPUTER and was able to load XP Pro the first time!
You would do because it didn't have any sort of 'sys'tem on it!

> I am thinking that it has to be either the CPU (AMD Athlon 1 GHz) or the motherboard.
Why are you blaming the hardware.? I can quite agree that if the CPU 
failed you could say this but considering it works FINE with DOS 
programs, the CPU cannot be the problem.

> So, the question now becomes: "Why will DOS programs work and not Windows?
Because Windows tries to control the pooter hardware whilst DOS just 
accepts it for what it is and uses it as it is, much like Linux. :)

73 de ZR1HPC
Hylton
-- 
The Little Helper
========================================================================
Hylton Conacher - Linux user # 229959 at http://counter.li.org
Currently using SuSE 9.0 Professional with KDE 3.1
Licenced Windows user
========================================================================