We are a computer-centric household; probably 90-plus percent of our interaction with the outside world is via our various machines, or "boxes" in studly geek-speak (or "boxen", for the truly annoying geekly touch). However, all of our machines but one speak some flavor or other of Linux or FreeBSD, and there are times when a Windows box is necessary – sad but true. So we have one ancient HP Vectra sitting in the basement, its twin SCSI drives whining away like little circular saws, running Windows 2000 for those times when we must call on the dark powers of Microsoft.
Recently I picked up a slightly less ancient Compaq machine at a garage sale (thirty five bucks!) as a potential replacement for the 7- or 8-year-old Vectra. It had twice the memory (but still not enough!) and four times the processor speed, a DVD-RW drive, a CD drive, a hard drive which purred rather than whined, a monitor whose red electron gun wasn't shot, and spiffy speakers (Age of Empires! In stereo! Finally!). The box came with Windows ME installed; I rolled my eyes – I scoff at your pathetic consumer-oriented operating system! Hah! – reformatted the drive and put on Win2K (as we studly geeks call it).
Reboot, and up comes the familiar desktop, but really grainy because it's in 640x480 pixel resolution. Hmmm, tweak the video settings – wait, the graphics card isn't recognized at all. What's up with that? This machine isn't that new. I have no idea what kind of graphics card it has. Pop in the Kubuntu disc (thank God for live discs!), reboot off that, and read off what Kubuntu thinks the card is – an S3 Savage4 – then pop the CD out, reboot into Windows, and go searching for S3 drivers for Win2K – web surfing at 640x480 resolution is not a pleasant experience, btw.
Find the drivers, download them, try to install – the machine doesn't recognize them as drivers at all. A dialog box blandly informs me, "No drivers for this device found." But I downloaded them direct from S3's site! Step away from the computer. Go outside. Hack at unruly yard vegetation.
I think, let's try this again, methodically. Slowly. Re-install the whole bleeding OS, then realize maybe it needs to be patched and upgraded first, before it will accept the Offering of the Drivers. Install Win2K. Reboot. Install Win2K Service Pack 4. Reboot. Install Windows Update. Reboot. Install many, many patches. Reboot. Re-visit S3's website, discover tool that detects graphics card version. Neat! Download. Install. Reboot. It's not a "Savage4", it's a "SavagePro". Download the SavagePro drivers. Install. Reboot. Hold breath, and – 1280x768 pixels! Obstacle overcome!
Now, install all the necessary software: Internet Explorer (or, as us geekly types call it, "Internet Exploder". Get it? "Exploder"!! Ha ha! We kill us, sometimes). Reboot. Acrobat PDF reader (reboot). The VPN client (reboot). Finally, just because of those spiffy stereo speakers and the DVD writer, I installed the iTunes client, and of course I then (all together now) rebooted.
Or at least I tried. The first half, the shutdown part, went ok. But the second half, where the disks spin and the lights blink and you end up with a working computer? Not so much. The Win2K splash screen came up, and the little blue progress bar made it about 2/3rds of the way across the screen – then silence. For a long, long time. After 10 minutes, I pushed the button, and tried again, hoping that we could just ignore that little faux pas, just pretend it never happened. But no, the computer stopped and sat there, sphinx-like, at the same point.
Now I remembered the other main thing I hated about Windows; its smug, superior attitude vis-a-vis the person sitting at the keyboard. With a UNIXy box, there would have probably been a screenful of text, some last dying cries for help sent out by the kernel as it vainly attempted to cope with some hardware or software malfunction, cries that would at least lend a bit of diagnostic help – but here, in Windowsland, nothing. It is not for you to know why I cannot boot, stupid little end-user! It is enough for you to know that I shall not.
Yes, yes, I tried 'safe mode', 'debugging mode', even 'command-line' mode. Sometimes it froze before the splash screen, sometimes during it. Other than that, no difference. I'm guessing it may have been a hard drive error – this household seems to be prone to them – so I broke out the diagnostic utilities disk and am now running the painstaking, many-hours-to-finish tests on the hard drive, then I'll run the painstaking, many-hours-to-finish tests on the memory chips, more for something to do than anything else. If it's not the hard drive, or maybe the memory, I don't really know what else to check – I guess there's the "jiggle all the cables" technique. But there's a limit on how much effort I want to put into a $35 machine. A $35 Windows machine.
...or "boxen", for the truly annoying geekly touch...
Ahhh, my golden youth.
With a UNIXy box, there would have probably been a screenful of text, some last dying cries for help...
And this is why I have always preferred *nix to those nasty GUI-driven applications (or OSes), which inevitably fail with -- at best -- a cryptic error message. "Segmentation fault" my ass. WHAT THE HELL DOES IT MEAN?? (It means: Our jaw-droppingly expensive, perenially-buggy software has yet another bug, this one rendering it all but useless for your purposes. Here's a patch that won't work.) This wasn't even a Microsoft product, by the way.
Do you have some prejudice against installing Windows on your Linux machines? It's a pain in the ass to have to stop real work and fool with Windows, but at least you have it if you absolutely need it. If I had more money I'd buy a dedicated Windows box (and I'd pay more than $35 for it).
I usually use Windows only for fluffy stuff (printing address labels and DVD sleeves, scanning in photos), but there's a certain large organization, which runs a very famous national facility, who require their grants to be administrated with a program which will only run under Red Hat or Windows 2000. Other flavors of Linux might work, unless they're 64 bit (which mine is), in which case to hell with 'em. Windows XP home-game is too insecure, they tell us.
So when I have to fiddle with it I have to fire up Niles's old desktop which runs an ancient version of Red Hat. Had to do the same thing last year, too.
By the way, did you try the unplugging trick? It's surprising how often that works.
Posted by: Angie Schultz on August 19, 2007 02:25 PM
Yeah, I tried the pull-the-plug trick and the boot-from-'emergency rescue disk' trick. What eventually, kind of, worked was to redo the base install into a separate system directory, and that at least allowed me to poke around the file system to search for some clue as to what is killing the boot. (Answer: nothing that I could see.) I tried setting it to dump driver loading events to a log, which the documentation claims is possible, but no such log was ever created. I updated the drivers in \WINNT2 (the new system directory) and everything seems ok, so far, except that there's a bunch of stuff installed into \WINNT that the system thinks ought to be in \WINNT2, so I'll either have to reinstall all that stuff (bo-ring!) or copy the files from one directory to the other (oh yeah, that'll be stable!).
Do you have some prejudice against installing Windows on your Linux machines?I don't like to dual-boot machines if I don't have to, and with these older boxes we have lying around, I don't have to. (Though maybe I could avoid experiences like this one if I did.)
Posted by: David Fleck on August 19, 2007 09:59 PM
I warned you people, but did you listen?
OK, seriously. Did you check the Windows "event viewer" (control panel/admin tools/computer mgmt/system tools)? I think it keeps track of driver loading.
Posted by: Jonathan on August 19, 2007 11:29 PM
Unix has segmentation violations too (SIGSEGV aka Sig11), and they're just as useless there as in Windows - but a fatal exception is rarely useful information anyway.
Me, I keep a reasonably current machine for windows, for the tools and the games, especially the games.
And a Mac for other desktop related things.
And linux or BSD for servers.
Because, Jesus Christ on Stilts, I'd rather chew on glass than use X on a desktop machine, or the godawful hackery linux -boosters try to push as a "desktop environment".
(Also, "Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content: x-.*\.[a-z]{2,} (match: x-.*\.[a-z]{2,})" is not very helpful in telling me what the hell it was ob-jecting to. Regular Expressions are write only unless you dream in sed or perl, and I call them nightmares. [And writing this, the "objecting" sentence got caught for containing "bj" and ending in "."
Jesus.)
Posted by: Sigivald on August 20, 2007 04:08 PM
Fleck does, as a matter of fact, dream in Perl.
Posted by: Moira on August 20, 2007 04:29 PM
...I'd rather chew on glass than use X on a desktop machine...I guess that's one of those de gustibus non est disputandum things, because that's pretty much the same reaction I have to the Windows user experience. I guess a lot of it comes down to what you use the machines for – I have little use for games or multimedia on a computer, and lots of use for text processing and internet access. I have no objections to an x-server with a bunch of xterms as my visual environment.
And I apologize for the overzealous spam filter. It does seem to enrage our commenters, and has been severely chastized.
Posted by: David Fleck on August 21, 2007 11:07 PM
FWIW, Compaq PCs were once infamous for having non-standard motherboards. As I recall, a common complaint was that they would often work with the drivers that came with them -- but not with updated drivers.
I understand your objections to dual-boot systems, but have had no trouble with mine. (I put Windows on one hard disk and one or more Linux distros on a second.) But then I imagine that space is not as expensive in your part of Iowa as it is in this Seattle suburb.
Posted by: Jim Miller on August 23, 2007 06:55 AM