You don't use Windows on LANs very much, do you?

Post #59,352 by CRConrad 10/25/02 2:39:22 AM Reply	You don't use Windows on LANs very much, do you? All Andy's complaints make perfect sense to me. (OK, except that I can't really remember if NT was so much better.) (And his joke on "How come?" was great! :-) Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #59,362 by andread 10/25/02 6:27:03 AM Reply	use Windows on LANs very much, thank you I don't know if NT was better or just different but sometimes the changes from one to the other get me down like when you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to lock workstation the key is now 'k' instead of 'w' mapping a printer in 2K is slow but fast in NT (in 2K my AD won't let me map to a printer even though they are listed so have to map the old way) in NT if I installed Office as admin on a client machine where drive C: was FAT and then later converted to NTFS when the user logged in they would be prompted every few seconds for the password for drive C: access in 2K w/ O2K you can't configure Outlook for the client unless you first configure it as admin (haven't done the XP/OXP trip yet) but my latest 'thrill' concerns the BIOS I had to take a machine from 2K to NT (don't tell Bill) and found that NT wouldn't run properly had to go reload BIOS defaults and re-install same thing when I took one from XP to NT (sorry, Steve) which leaves 2 questions: 1) why does the OS write to the BIOS 2) what does the OS write to the BIOS for all I know there are reasons for these thing A Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM Reggae, African and Caribbean Music [link\|http://wxxe.org\|Tune In]
Post #59,365 by CRConrad 10/25/02 7:10:54 AM Reply	Uhm, eh... The question WAS directed to Don "Silverlock"... ...since he didn't seem to understand what troubles you were talking about -- or indeed, even that that was what you were doing. "Andrea Dear" writes: I don't know if NT was better or just different but sometimes the changes from one to the other get me down Yeah, well, personally I just can't remember these details distinctly enough to be able to say whether your complaints are valid or not. (But at least I recognize them as such! :-) But, Andy, one of these last ones really seems a bit stupid to me: like when you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to lock workstation the key is now 'k' instead of 'w' No, it's the same key it's always been: [Enter]! What, you really futz around with letter keys when the button you want is the one that has the efault focus in the dialogue?!? I'd never even noticed what that key was, in either version! Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #59,374 by static 10/25/02 8:59:47 AM Reply	BIOS and NT. Your BIOS experience has to do with the ACPI support in the BIOS (I think that's right). If it's off when you install Windows 2000 - and probably XP - then there's a core component that is different than if ACPI is on when you install Windows 2000. Of course, NT's support for power management and device enumeration is older and can get confused if things aren't what they seem. Also, Windows likes to control the PC. The BIOS setting "Plug-n-Play OS" is really misnamed. It should be called "Windows OS" because when it's "on" it sets up the device enumeration in a way that Microsoft insisted Windows needs for it to diddle as it likes. This would also contribute to NT behaving oddly. Now I'm glossing over stuff here, mostly because there are a lot of details I don't know. Wade. "Ah. One of the difficult questions."
Post #59,434 by scoenye 10/25/02 1:31:35 PM Reply	And don't forget the "conflicting credentials" one So you can only connect to multiple shares on a server as a single user.
Post #59,691 by Silverlock 10/26/02 11:00:56 PM Reply	Sorry to say, but I do. When I responded originally I was under the weather (drunk as a lord). Now that I think on it, the only way to describe the insanity of windows networking must perforce seem insane on it's face. "A civilian gang of thieving lobbyists for the military industrial complex is running the White House. If to be against them is considered unpatriotic -- Hell, then call me a traitor." -- Hunter S. Thompson
Post #59,745 by andread 10/27/02 10:15:26 AM Reply	Re: Sorry to say, but I do. Does this mean you recognize the validity of my original comments or not? A Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM Reggae, African and Caribbean Music [link\|http://wxxe.org\|Tune In]
Post #59,776 by Silverlock 10/27/02 3:44:18 PM Reply	Yep I accept. Don't know about calling questions comments, but so what. What is your network built on? NT, 2000? Is Active Directory in use? How was the admin login done (Local or Domain.)? "A civilian gang of thieving lobbyists for the military industrial complex is running the White House. If to be against them is considered unpatriotic -- Hell, then call me a traitor." -- Hunter S. Thompson

Welcome to IWETHEY!