Troubleshooting quiz answer

Thanks to everyone who played along in yesterday’s troubleshooting quiz.

The consensus answer was correct: My video card had come loose and needed reseating in its slot.

Clue number 1 was the complete absence of display on the screen. That could have meant that the monitor(s) had become unplugged, but the power lights were still on, so that clearly wasn’t it. Any kind of software failure or a corrupted hard disk would have allowed the Power-On Self Test routine to appear on screen before failing.

It had been a warm day, so I considered the possibility that the machine had overheated. But if that were the case I would have known it, because the fans would have been working overtime right before the failure. And the fact that it didn’t restart even after a proper cooling-down period ruled that out.

Memory errors? Those usually result in visible failures – random crashes and misleading error messages. I wouldn’t expect bad RAM to shut down the whole video subsystem.

That left two options: Motherboard failure (bad) or problem with video card (not so bad). I strongly suspected the video card because of the three beep tones. This is an Intel board, as I pointed out obliquely in the description of the problem. I turned to a handy list of error messages associated with each beep code on this machine. (If you have a different BIOS, visit that page and follow the links in the sidebar.) Three beeps – one long, two short – means a video adapter problem.

I unplugged both monitors, removed the PCI-e video card, visually inspected it to make sure nothing was obviously wrong, and reseated it in its slot. When I turned the computer back on, I had a signal to both displays again. If this step hadn’t worked, the next option would have been to try another video card.

So, how does a card come loose in the first place? Well, this machine has been jostled around a fair amount in the past few months as I’ve swapped out various components (network cards, hard drives, TV tuners) while testing Windows Vista. In all that moving, I never fiddled with the video card. But it obviously had come loose enough (a micron here, a micron there, pretty soon you’re up to half a millimeter) that one slight motion did it in.

Props to Carl, who was first to suggest this solution.

No prizes this time, but next time I’ll give away a book or two and make the challenge a little tougher.

This site’s browser stats, updated

With the help of SiteMeter, I’ve been keeping track of which browsers are used by visitors to this site. The latest stats continue to confirm that most people have made up their minds about which browser they want to use:

The last time I published these stats was on April 30, 2006. The share of visitors using Firefox or Mozilla has dipped roughly 1% since then, from 35.2% down to 34.18%. It’s still a bit higher than the August 2005 share of 33.2%, however.

Meanwhile, IE’s share crept back up by 1.5%, from almost exactly 60% to 61.47%. Not surprisingly, the percentage of people visiting this site using IE7 has more than doubled, from 6.53% last April to 14.52% today.

Five months ago, I drew this tentative conclusion and made a prediction:

The easy gains for Firefox are over. I’ll be very surprised if Firefox is able to make any significant gains in share when I look at this snapshot six months from now. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that IE will gain back some ground during that time with the help of IE7.

I jumped the gun by a month, but the prediction appears accurate. And although Firefox 2 looks like a perfectly solid upgrade, it doesn’t offer anything that’s likely to convince IE holdouts to switch now.

Trend-watchers can look at all previous editions by following these links:

April 2006

August 2005

October 2004

Update: Here’s a chart I put together showing the general trends among the major browsers. I combined all versions of each product into a single number to make the trend easier to see. (Click to see a larger version.)

SP2-phobic? Then circle October 10 on your calendar

Mary Jo Foley points out that support for Windows XP SP1 ends October 10.

SP2 has been out for more than two years. It’s been installed on hundreds of millions of computers. If there’s an issue that’s keeping you from installing it, there’s undoubtedly a solution.

Frankly, I can’t imagine why someone would insist on running an outdated, demonstrably insecure version of Windows. If you’re still resisting SP2, please tell me why. (And “I tried to install it and it crashed my system” isn’t good enough. If that’s true, there’s almost certainly a specific incompatibility that you can troubleshoot and fix.)

A troubleshooting quiz

Ah, the joys of hardware!

Last night, as I was reaching the end of the first shift (5:00PM, which is followed by a dinner break and then the second shift – ah, the joys of writing books about beta software), my computer screen suddenly went black. A second earlier, I had a half-dozen apps open, and then … nothing.

After trying in vain to make something reappear on the screen, I pressed the power switch, held it down for five seconds, and waited as the computer restarted. This time I heard, from inside the case, three faint beeps. Nothing appeared on the screen, however. And I mean nothing. No BIOS messages, no Intel logo, no prompts from a storage adapter … nothing.

I took the cover off the computer, powered it on again, and checked inside. Everything looked normal. All fans were working, I could hear chattering noises from each hard drive at startup, and nothing was emitting smoke.

Eventually, I solved the problem. What troubleshooting did I have to do, and what was the solution?

All the information you need is in the post above.

Update: I have two monitors attached to this system. Both went black at precisely the same time, and the power light remained on for each one. So no, the solution wasn’t as simple as plugging in the monitor.

There have been some good comments so far. The correct answer might even be in there already. I’m going to leave comments open for the rest of the day to give working folks (especially those who can’t check this site during the workday) a chance to take a crack at it.

Update #2: This is not the same computer that experienced memory problems a few weeks ago. That was a Dell server. This is a desktop machine that was built by Mwave in August 2005.

OK, here’s the answer.

ISO images, Windows Vista, and disk space

In the comments to my earlier post on using ISO images to mount disk-based copies of CDs and DVDs, MarConey asks a good question, starting with an inventory of available disk space on his current system:

C: – 30 gig HDD, 7 gigs free; has Win XP Home on it.
M: – 80 gig HDD, 50 gigs free; has mostly music files stored on it.

Let’s say I extract the necessary files from the ISO to the M: drive and then run setup from there. Will I be able to upgrade Win XP as things now stand or do I still really need to have 15 gigs free on that C: drive??? Because, I really don’t want to have to go through the exercise of copying everything over to a bigger drive first and then doing the upgrade, etc., or, re-installing every single program and driver, etc…..if I don’t have to.

OK, first of all, you don’t want to extract the files to the M: drive. You want to either burn the ISO image to a DVD or mount it so the system thinks it’s a DVD.

Second, you really do need a full 15GB of space? As it turns out, I have nearly a perfect test bed for this scenario. In a virtual machine, I had Windows XP installed on a 16GB hard drive, with roughly 11GB free. I copied a 3GB file to the C: drive so that it had less than 8GB free and then added a second virtual hard drive with 50GB of free space.

With that out of the way, I started the upgrade from the DVD. A few hours later (yeah, it took a long time) the upgrade was complete. The installer was able to use some space on the second drive and still had plenty of room left on the first drive when all was done.

So yes, you can install Vista on a machine with less free space than you might think.

WGA is a mess

Microsoft insists that its Windows Genuine Activation anti-piracy tool is nearly flawless, and they are “confident that validation results are accurate.”

Sorry, but that’s a load of crap. And if you don’t believe me, go read Microsoft’s own support forums.

That’s what I did, with the help of a researcher. We found that Microsoft’s own support representatives now acknowledge that WGA problems “are coming up more commonly.” We found examples of people who were running copies of Windows XP that are incontrovertibly legitimate and who did everything Microsoft asked of them who were unable to resolve their WGA problems. We found a widely used security tool from McAfee that triggered false WGA counterfeit notices for a full month. And we tallied the numbers to discover that a staggering 42% of the people who reported WGA failures on Microsoft’s official support forum were running Genuine copies of Windows XP.

It’s a disgrace. And Microsoft didn’t want to hear the details when I offered to share them.

I’ve posted the whole story at ZDNet:

Microsoft admits WGA failures “coming up more commonly now”

If you have questions or comments, you can leave them in the Talkback section there or in the comments here.

Vista Build 5728? Caveat testor

As several people have already noted, Windows Vista Build 5728 is now available for download. It’s an update to RC1 that has quite a few bug fixes and cosmetic tweaks. Before you head off to download it, though, read this paragraph from the official download page at least twice: 

This build (5728) has a number of improvements and updates from RC1, but has not been put through the same internal testing process as RC1 and therefore may be unstable in certain installations. We are making this release available for a limited time only (and only by download) in order to get broad distribution and testing in a variety of PC configurations. Please note: This build may not have the same level of support or servicing via Windows Update, and you may not be able to upgrade to the final version of Windows Vista.

Personally, I am continuing to use RC1 on a couple of production systems (including the one I’m using to create this post). I’m installing 5728 and other interim beta releases on virtual machines and non-critical systems that I know I will reformat many times between now and January. (The RC1 download is still available here.)

Seriously, if you’re thinking about installing this build on a system that contains critical apps or data, go back and read that paragraph above three more times.

Ziff Davis is not ZDNet (and vice versa)

Ziff Davis Media publishes a bunch of print magazine (including PC Magazine). Its sister company, Ziff Davis Internet, runs sites like Microsoft Watch and ExtremeTech. I work for a site called ZDNet. Both companies have ZD in their name, so they must be related, right?

Wrong.

Stephen Howard-Sarin, a VP at ZDNet and an 18-year veteran of this wacky industry, explains how it all started, many years ago:

Ziff Davis started an online division called ZDNet. Ziff Davis started a cable TV operation called ZDTV.

Ziff Davis split up. The magazine group kept the name. ZDNet was sold to CNET. ZDTV was rebranded TechTV (and later sold to G4).

Confusingly, many people through the years have worked for both companies. I was an editor at Ziff Davis’ PC Computing for nearly 10 years. I worked for TechRepublic before it was owned by CNET. Folks like Dan Farber and David Berlind and now Mary Jo Foley all worked at Ziff Davis back in the day and are now affiliated with ZDNet, part of CNET Networks, Inc.

It’s a tribute to the late Bill Ziff that the equity in his name is worth so much that none of these companies have given it up.