Category: Windows

How old is too old?

As an experiment, I just resuscitated a Y2K-era notebook with a few inexpensive hardware upgrades, split its hard disk into two 20GB partitions, and installed Windows XP with Service Pack 2 on one and Ubuntu Linux on the other. The results were surprising. (You can read all about it in Linux, XP and my old PC.)

That six-year-old PC turned out to be far from obsolete, which got me thinking about the nature of PC obsolescence.

My first IBM-based computer was built in the early 1980s by a Korean clonemaker and sold under the Leading Edge brand name. It had an Intel 8086 processor running at 8MHz or so and 512K of RAM, if I recall correctly. It had a monochrome monitor, at least one 5.25” floppy drive, and a hard disk whose capacity was measured in some small number of megabytes.

I replaced it with a succession of computers over the next ten years, each with incrementally larger hard disks and slightly faster processors. When I was testing beta versions of Windows 95 (then code-named Chicago) in 1993 and 1994, I was probably using a 33MHz 486 processor with 4MB (or maybe an eye-popping 8MB) of RAM.

Would you expect any of those ancient PCs to be even marginally useful today? Don’t make me laugh. Even the first-generation Pentium 133 and 166 models I spent more than $2000 to purchase in 1996 and 1997 would be nearly useless a mere decade later.

I was able to run the first release of Windows XP (including beta versions from 2000) on PCs built around Intel’s Pentium II series chips from 1998 or so. XP on a 233MHz  wasn’t fast, but it worked. I wouldn’t do that today, however, mostly because the cost of the EDO memory chips it used would be prohibitive. It would probably run $100 to bring it up to its max of 192MB!

Basically, I think any computer using the Pentium 3 family or later and built in 1999 or later should probably be usable with Windows XP today, assuming you can find memory upgrades at a reasonable price.

A Windows brain-teaser

Think you’re a Windows expert? Here’s a stumper for you. See if you can guess the answer.

On my primary hard disk, I have a folder filled with 430 digital image files in JPEG format. Collectively, they occupy a little under 300MB of disk space.

I want to copy those files from one machine to another using a 1GB USB flash drive I have hanging around. The flash drive is formatted and completely empty.

I open Windows Explorer, select all the image files, and drag them onto the flash drive icon. Windows begins copying the files to the portable drive, but about a third of the way through, the copying process stops with a cryptic error message containing the code 0x80070052: “The directory or file cannot be created.”

What’s the problem, and how can I fix it?

First one to get the correct answer wins a signed copy of Windows XP Inside Out, Second Edition.

Update: We have a winner. See the comments for the discussion. Here’s a more detailed explanation:

The problem is that the flash drive, like many USB devices, was formatted using the FAT16 file system. Most Windows users haven’t had to deal with this disk format in years. FAT32 was introduced in 1996, and Windows XP has supported NTFS as the default file system since its introduction in 2001.

So what’s the problem? FAT16 volumes impose a strict limit of 512 entries in the root directory (you can have as many as you want in subfolders). A KB article, Errors Creating Files or Folders in the Root Directory, explains:

This problem occurs when all 512 root directory entries have been used. This problem can also occur with fewer than 512 files and folders in the root directory because Windows 95 uses additional directory entries to store long file names.

A table at the end of this article explains that long filenames typically use four directory entries, and my digital image files were definitely using long names. So at 4 directory entries per file and 512 entries total, I was running out of room to store filenames when I hit 128 files.

The solution was to create a subfolder on the flash drive and copy the files there instead. As soon as I did that, all was well. 

True tales from the WGA front

From Microsoft’s Windows Genuine Advantage blog, May 18, 2006:

I’m starting this blog because I would like to share some of the cool things our team is doing and because we want to hear from you. We want to know what you like and don’t like about WGA and our efforts to reduce piracy of Microsoft products while at the same time offering great benefits to users of genuine and licensed Microsoft software. I also want to know what you think we can do to make WGA better.

[…]

BTW, I will enable comments to start with and look forward to a frank and honest exchange of ideas. Also, I won’t be offering any technical support through this blog but I am happy to point people to the numerous support resources we have.

Comment posted to that same entry, July 16, 2006:

[A]fter recieving a flag telling me my Windows XP Professional might not be genuine, I did the right thing and checked up with Microsft through the telephone support network.

After speaking with five different people 2 told me my Windows package was invalid and 3 told me it was genuine, even so they issued me with a new product key “HEY GUESS WHAT” this new product key has really screwed up my computer.

Since being a caring honest type of guy and registering my concerns I have had nothing but no end of trouble with me recently bought computer.

What has Microsft done about it?

Uttered their sympathies and concerns, had me sat at my computer for over 3.5 days listening to foreign engineer having to repeat everything as clarity of instruction was not perfect to say the least. Well four weeks on I still have to register my Windows with the registration team, mind you! somthing different happened today “I cannot register the new programme Microsoft sent me BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN REGISTERED TOO MANY TIMES or is this not a genuine copy sent direct to me from Microsoft.

Well I have had some success after 7 attempts I finally got through to the telephone registration team and after a bout of intense listening and a number of repeating the number sequence I finally got registered, but hey in this energy efficient world we live in I am not going to switch my computer off paying the electricity bill is less stressful than switching on my computer.

[…]

I only want to switch on my computer and start work without having to re-register every time, JUST LIKE IT DID BEFORE MICROSOFT SENT FRIGHTENING POP UPS TELLING ME IT MAY NOT BE GENUINE.

I can’t wait to see the response.

Meanwhile, if you have a WGA horror story, please post it in the comments here.

Tip of the day: Make your own Windows Lock shortcut

This one’s by request. A commenter who goes by the handle justforfun wants to know is there’s a way to create “a windows lock icon (something that replicates what the ‘show desktop’ icon does for win+D, except for win+L.”

Yes, indeed. I’ve written about the Lock keyboard shortcut before, but this option is useful if you’re mouse-centric or if your keyboard doesn’t have a Windows log key.

Create a new shortcut using the following command:

rundll32.exe user32.dll,LockWorkStation

Note that there’s a space after the initial executable and no space after the comma.

Give the shortcut a descriptive name and place it on the desktop or the Start menu. You’re now able to lock your computer with a single click.

Untangling Windows license confusion

In the comments to an earlier post on Windows licensing, Pam asks:

I recently bought a used computer(windows 98) because my old one died and I have a back-up copy of windows xp from my old computer, can I use the windows xp cd and install it on my windows 98 computer?

The correct answer, of course, as with all things Windows-related, is, “Maybe.” Before I can answer that question, I need two additional pieces of information:

  1. What type of license was included with the original copy of Windows XP? If it was an OEM copy that came preinstalled with the computer, then no, you can’t transfer it. The terms of an OEM license say you can run it only on the computer on which it was installed originally. If it was a retail copy, either a full copy or an upgrade, then …

  2. What happened to the old computer? If you’re still using it, or if you sold it or gave it away without completely removing Windows XP, then no, you can’t legally reuse the license. But if you completely wiped it clean and kept the CD, the product key, and the certificate of authenticity, then yes, you can install it on the new computer.

Note that there’s a difference between you can legally do and what you can do in practice. Legally, you can have Windows XP installed on only one computer at the same time. In practice, however, you can activate your copy of Windows XP on a second computer, maybe even a third or fourth, by activating each subsequent installation over the phone and telling a tall tale to the agent on the phone.

For more questions (and answers!) about licensing Windows and Office, see How much do you know about Microsoft licensing? at ZDNet.

Why I still care about Windows

Sometimes the most interesting discussions in the blogosphere occur in comments. Case in point: There’s a vigorous, spirited, occasionally acrimonious conversation going on in the comments at Mini-Microsoft’s blog. One commenter ticked off a list of what Microsoft has done in the Windows space since 2001 and was greeted with this reply from another commenter:

Service packs now count as great products?

To which Mini responds:

For XP SP2, yes. To call this a “service pack” is to belittle what it truly is. We should have called it something far more dramatic and important to represent the stop everything! moment that happened to recreate XP and put in security measures that match the modern world’s risks.

The ball was dropped not only in the promotion of this product but also in the distribution. All that effort, and then XP SP2 was basically told to slip out through the bit-dribbler back door and not make any noise vs. being heavily promoted and distributed.

We really should have heralded this accomplishment at the time. Shipping XP SP2 is what I see as a proud turning point for XP and Windows.

(crickets.)

Yes, really.

Apple has released – what? – five new versions of OS X since 2001, each with a catchy animal name. In essence, they’re service packs that deliver both bug fixes and new features. Customers have to pay for them. But they get credit for keeping their OS up to date.

Meanwhile, since 2001 Microsoft has produced:

  • SP2, which as Mini correctly points out should have been given a fancy name (no, not Windows XP Reloaded) and distributed as a free upgrade
  • Three releases of Windows Media Center, the latest of which is arguably the best Windows ever and is the default choice on most premium home PCs these days
  • Windows Server 2003 (with a service pack and an R2 refresh), which basically shut up the “Microsoft can’t produce a secure, reliable server” crowd and which will serve as the code base for Windows Vista
  • Two releases of Windows Mobile for handheld devices, the latest of which absolutely rocks
  • A couple versions of Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, which basically put to rest the old stereotypes of handwriting recognition, ironically created by Apple’s Newton.

When people ask me why I still care about Windows, this is what I tell them.

The security software racket

In the middle of a post about Microsoft’s new Windows Live Messenger service, Dwight Silverman’s guest blogger Jim Thompson writes:

At home I don’t install IM software both because I have little need for it and because I see it as just another source of viruses and other malware.

One could make the same argument about e-mail, I suppose. Or networking. Or mobile phones.

And can anyone point me to the treasure trove of “viruses and other malware” that sneak in via IM products? Because I’m sure not seeing them out there in the real world. Googling the subject turns up a flurry of scare-mongering articles from 2003, 2004, and early 2005, all of which report on the alarming increase in IM viruses and predict that this year will be the year that IM-borne viruses finally take off. Oh, wait! Here’s yet another scare-mongering article from June 2006 – “a 500 per cent increase in IM attacks during last month alone.” Details? Bah! Who needs details?

I would take all these articles much more seriously except for the fact that every single one just happens to tout a new study from a security software company that just coincidentally happens to have the product that will solve this alarming new problem.

Nice racket.

Update: In the comments, Jim Thompson responds:

Look at my statement this way, Ed: IF I had a serious need for IM software THEN it would be worth dealing with the malware risk. In the case of networking and email, the need if the technology is worth the trouble of dealing with malware.

Maybe I’ve been duped by the security folks, but tell me: isn’t it true that IM can be used to send executables? And I know for a fact that *any* executable can contain a virus, rootkit, or trojan horse. Given that I’m not that familiar with IM software (something that I mention in the post) and that IM would be used mainly by my young daughters (something I didn’t mention), isn’t it prudent to simply not give malware another route onto my systems?

My reply:

There are three completely separate issues at work here, and conflating them just confuses the discussion.

1. If you don’t need a particular class of software, don’t install it. I’ve been preaching that gospel for years, and it’s still true. Any program can introduce possible security and stability problems, so why install something you don’t need? This argument isn’t unique to IM software.

2. Your kids are the ones who might use this software? Of course you should look carefully at it before installing it. Not just because they can download executables, but because they can communicate with strangers. In my opinion, this is a parenting issue, not a computer security question.

3. Can IM be used to send executable files? Well, yes, as can e-mail. In the case of Windows Live Messenger, there is a fairly easy to access setting that allows you to automatically block ALL known unsafe attachments, including types that aren’t normally considered executable. In addition, the software has an integrated and apparently free virus scanner.

I agree that you should evaluate any Internet-facing software carefully before installing it, but falling for the security industry’s fear tactics is a bad starting point for that evaluation process.

Update 2: Jim has posted an excellent follow-up here.

Are you having Windows Genuine Advantage problems?

Two months ago, Microsoft pushed an update of its Windows validation software, part of the Windows Genuine Advantage program, to all Windows XP users. I’m hearing an increasing number of reports of problems with this update. I’ve written about this at ZDNet (Microsoft presses the Stupid button).

If you’ve experienced WGA problems recently, I’m interested in hearing about it. Leave a comment here and describe your experience.