WIn XP cant post

[Argo]

The FireWall could be blocking cookies. What firewall(s) are people using?

[Waccoon]

They contracted VAX to bring NT4 up to the same level as Windows95. Later, Microsoft put their mits on and pulled and yanked at the sources.

Are you sure it was the same people who wrote VAX?  I do remember that Microsoft commisioned several companies to collectivly write the NT5 core under Microsoft's direction.

All I know is that I have used Win2000 for well over a year and never had a USB problem or any other type of problem thats with all the IE 6.0 and Windows 2000 patches installed, but as soon as I tried Win XP home edition with all the IE6.0 and XP pathes I could not post on here.
No idea why it just happens that way.

If it acts like you're not logged in, it's a cookie problem.  If not, it's a firewall problem.  Althought Win2K and XP have IE6.0, the defaults for cookies are set up differently, and, of course, XP has a built-in firewall, while Win2K does not (I prefer a router for a simple firewall, personally).

But it was the IRQ_USB_Lessthan or some error message like that. Its been forever since I got that error message.

Yup.  That's a driver-level error.  Do you have a VIA chipset?  They are infamous for that.

Last week I updated the drivers for my GeForce card. Since then I`ve had no end of random resets and BSODs..
Then I noticed my gfx card was so hot, I couldn`t touch it for even a second. I checked the speed settings of the drivers and found the newer drivers had doubled the standard memory clock of the card
Still can`t believe the card survived being overclocked that much.

The FX was overclocked to the point of exploding, but even the GeForce4 has issues.  My dad has a tiny heatsink fan on his GF4 and it burns to the touch.  I myself had to put an Arctic Cooling VGA Silencer on my ATI 9800Pro, and not only did it drop my GPU temp 30 degrees, it reduced my Northbridge temp by 5.  Video cards are getting to be worse than CPUs when it comes to heat.

As for drivers, nVidia is in real trouble right now.  Their new drivers SUCK, and don't look as good as the ATI drivers.  I'm not surprised they've resort to shadow overclocking in an attempt to get their speeds up.

[Hammer]

@Waccoon

With Forceware 60.72, I haven’t detected unauthorized
overclocking (along with driver’s "cool bits" feature turned on) on the following NVIDIA products.
1. Albatron FX 5900/5900U/5950U PV,
2. Leadtek Geforce 4200 TI, Quadro4 700 XGL.
3. (Noname) Geforce 2 MX/400.

[Hammer]

Waccoon wrote:

I seriously think many crashes are unfairly blamed on Windows when drivers are the culprit (nVidia comes to mind.  Their newest drivers SUCK!)

Which version?  

[Morley]

I also had a problem where I couldn't post. Whenever I logged in, the only page I could access was my p-mail and the account settings page. This occured on Firefox and IE on XP, and IBrowse on WinUAE. I got tired and made a new account, and then it all worked.

If you want to play around with my account which won't work, log in as "askripel" with pw "hahaha".

[Ilwrath]

   I seriously think many crashes are unfairly blamed on Windows when drivers are the culprit (nVidia comes to mind. Their newest drivers SUCK!)

Which version?

I was kind of wondering the same thing.  I'm running the couple month-old 56.64's, and they've been nothing but rock solid on a GeForce 4Ti 4200 OC'd to almost 4600 speeds.  ;-)

The GeForce FX series sometimes mis-reports RAM speed, as for some reason the program reports/doesn't report the DDR'd rate.  Probably what happened.....  (I'm not sure I like the FX series...  I've stuck to my 4Ti.  Less headaches.  Might go to ATi next... But I've heard THOSE drivers are even worse than nVidia's, most of the time... and especially in Linux.  :-(  )

[Hammer]

The GeForce FX series sometimes mis-reports RAM speed, as for some reason the program reports/doesn't report the DDR'd rate.

What's your method in detecting the GFX's cclk and mclk? Is it by driver’s "cool bits" features or by third party applications?

they've been nothing but rock solid on a GeForce 4Ti 4200 OC'd to almost 4600 speeds.

Note that the Geforce 5900 (PV) normal editions can be softmod’ed to 5900U or 5950U via BIOS reflash e.g. Albatron’s heatsink is the same across 59xx series.  

FX OC’ing may have issues with FX bottom end cards e.g. FX 5200. FX 5600 can be soft'moded to FX 5700 (use google for success rates and comments) .  

The success of OC can be influence by PS, type of motherboard(e.g. A7N8X Dlx Rev 1.04), gfx memory timings, build quality of Gfx card i.e. if I O’C my Geforce TI 4200 to 4400 level it will destabilize the related voltages lines (via ASUS Probe). It still works at 4400 level but it may stress motherboard's related power regulators. Leadtek has stated that there’s a minor difference between Leadtek 4400 and Leadtek 4200 in terms stabilization circuits. PS; GA-7N400Pro2 can handle it due to a separate P4 style power lines.    

[Doobrey]

Waccoon wrote:
 I'm not surprised they've resort to shadow overclocking in an attempt to get their speeds up.

 I wouldn`t call what it did to my card "shadow overclocking", seeing as it set it to double it`s original rate.
 Before my card was warm after a couple of hours gaming, but after the new driver it felt like it had just come out of an oven, even the PCB was too hot to touch.
 Anyway, I clicked on the "restore default" button, and it then set both memory and core to 0 Mhz ! :-x
 So I`ve gone back to the older (and slower) drivers, but at least my system is stable again.

[Hammer]

@Doobrey

What driver version and gfx card build?

[Waccoon]

Hammer:  Which version?

56.72 WHQL.  He was getting about 4-5 BSOD a night with all his games.  I don't know what he's using now, but he told me they're about a year old, and his system is very stable, now, so he's sticking with them.

Ilwrath:  I'm not sure I like the FX series... I've stuck to my 4Ti. Less headaches.

My brother-in-law bought an FX retail (the cheap one with no fan), and he's had massive overheating problems since day one.  ATI cards are hot, too, but not THAT hot.

Ilwrath:  Might go to ATi next... But I've heard THOSE drivers are even worse than nVidia's, most of the time... and especially in Linux

News to me.  I've been using the 4.5 Catalyst drivers for a while and I haven't had any problems (the resetting problems I was having last month was because I shorted out my power supply when rewiring my case fans.  Oops).

[Ilwrath]

What's your method in detecting the GFX's cclk and mclk? Is it by driver’s "cool bits" features or by third party applications?

I was looking at 3rd party applications.  For instance, 3DMark03 seems to get quite confused by the clock rates.  Looking through the results page, there's no telling what cards report for their cclk and mclk...  

Now, I don't have a ton of experience with the FX series cards, and none with overclocking them.  The only one I have is a base FX5200 in my fiancee's Dell.  It runs solid on the 56.64 drivers, as well.  Now, there's no overclock going on there.  Didn't even install CoolBits -- to keep the relationship happy, I don't mess with her computer too much..  ;-)  

(on possibly switching to ATi)

News to me. I've been using the 4.5 Catalyst drivers for a while and I haven't had any problems

Well, that's reassuring.  At least I'd be able to play games.  ;-)  Do you run any Linux stuff?  What do you think of the Linux drivers?

[StevenJGore]

The FireWall could be blocking cookies. What firewall(s) are people using?

I use Norton Firewall 2004, and I cannot post on Amiga.org unless I specifically add "www.amiga.org" to the advanced configurations settings page that controls privacy settings per website/domain.

And about the Windows XP stability issue that people have mentioned... I've used Windows XP Professional since release, and haven't had it crash on me once. As people have said, drivers can play an important factor in stability, and so can installing badly-written dodgy software (such as Realplayer, Quicktime, etc.) It frustrates me when I see peoples Windows desktops and I notice that they have about five hundred icons in their system tray from memory-resident programs that load on startup... and they are usually the ones that complain about speed and stability!

[Waccoon]

Do you run any Linux stuff? What do you think of the Linux drivers?

Can't say.  I don't use Linux enough, so I gave the GeForce3 to my dad and now have a TNT2 and Celeron 400 in my Linux box.  I can't get *any* 3D graphics out of that thing, but my Linux system is for code, anyway.

I wouldn't even THINK of putting Linux and Windows on the same machine, so Linux gets the leftovers.  ;-)

As people have said, drivers can play an important factor in stability, and so can installing badly-written dodgy software (such as Realplayer, Quicktime, etc.) It frustrates me when I see peoples Windows desktops and I notice that they have about five hundred icons in their system tray from memory-resident programs that load on startup... and they are usually the ones that complain about speed and stability!

That's where all the stability complaints come from.  My Amiga didn't crash often, but it only had 2 background tasks (Magic Requester and StarClick).  MacOS 8 was a nightmare, since it had almost 200 system extensions, so tracking down a problem was a pest -- and that was just for the system, never mind 3rd-party extensions!  Comparitively speaking, Windows really isn't that bad in terms of reliability.  It's just the programming interfaces and registry that suck sewage.

Besides, if you own 95% of the market, you'll be a scapegoat for all badly written software, whether it's your fault or not.

[mikeymike]

But I know for sure that it was a fatal mistake to go with Windows 2000. Don't see how it is even great to use. It has too many USB problems even with the latest service pack. The worst part is when I play a few games, and it suddenly locks up. The blue screen of death comes up for 1/2 a second and your computer mysteriously resets. Guess it turns out to be a USB -related problem.

Err, no stability or USB problems here, never have been...

[BoingBoss]

Windows XP SUCKS !!!!

I still use Windows 98 Second Edition.  It is the best Windows for home use.  Windows 2000 and NT are best for business.

[B00tDisk]

BoingBoss wrote:
Windows XP SUCKS !!!!

I still use Windows 98 Second Edition.  It is the best Windows for home use.  Windows 2000 and NT are best for business.

Hello Doomy, you're still an idiot.  DOS based Windows OS's blow goats.  You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.  '98SE is crap.  Win2k is fine for home use.  I happen to use XP as it's far more compatible with games, however.