Icon Confusion

[lb]

On Aug 25, 9:28 am, Dan <D...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> It reminds me of when I worked at Target and we used LRT's and sometimes the
> machine needed a full cold reboot rather than just a warm reboot. If I
> remember correctly, the warm reboot was just a reset as compared to the cold
> reboot which was a shutdown, wait a little bit and then restart the LRT.
> Some of the problems with the LRT's could only be solved with a cold reboot.
> I think now Target already has a sucessor that they use to this technology
> but interesting to me just the same. I had no idea that it was relevant with
> plain old computers as well.
>
>
>
> "Bill in Co." wrote:
> > It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots. Just one
> > cold reboot.
>
> > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > > Huh? Turning off the machine then back on isn't any different than a
> > reboot.
> > > When you delete ShellIconCache, it isn't rebuilt until the second shut
> > down
> > > or reboot, whichever you choose, no matter how you get it to that point.
>
> > > --
> > > Gary S. Terhune
> > > MS-MVP Shell/User
> > >www.grystmill.com
>
> > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_h...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > >news:u1p9cTE5HHA.5796@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > >> lb wrote:
> > >>> On Aug 21, 3:19 pm, H...@invalid.com wrote:
> > >>>> This is Win98se
> > >>>> For some reason there is some icon confusion going on. For example, I
> > >>>> have a program called "Hosts Toggle" (to turn on and off the hosts
> > >>>> file). Right now, all files with the PDF extension have the icon from
> > >>>> "Hosts Toggle". Text files (.txt) have an icon from another program
> > >>>> instead of the notepad icon.
>
> > >>>> The next time I reboot, the icons will be different and some other
> > >>>> extension will have the wrong icon, for example last night all the
> > >>>> .jpg files had an icon from another folder on my desktop.
>
> > >>>> Everything else is working fine. Why is this happeningt and how do I
> > >>>> fix it?
>
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >>>> HN
>
> > >>> If you have TweakUI, you can go to the repair tab and repair the
> > >>> icons.
>
> > >>> Your shelliconcache file may be too small or damaged. You can delete
> > >>> it and windows will make a new one on the 2nd boot.
>
> > >> Or just turn off the computer, and then turn it on a few seconds later,
> > >> and
> > >> you won't have to reboot twice - or thrice (possibly).
>
> > >>> You can increase the size with programs such as Cacheman or X Setup.
> > >>> Both of these have older free versions. Post if you do not have any
> > >>> of these.
>
> > >>> Another thing is that if you are using a desktop shortcut to rapidly
> > >>> shutdown windows, stop using it as it prevents your shelliconcache
> > >>> from being rewritten properly.
>
> > >> Not for me it doesn't (and hasn't). I've had a desktop shortcut for
> > >> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I wonder if the original poster ever got their problem fixed!

 

[Dan]

Well, if the original poster did not get the original problem fixed then I
think it would make sense to start a new thread since this thread is really
long.

"lb" wrote:

> On Aug 25, 9:28 am, Dan <D...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > It reminds me of when I worked at Target and we used LRT's and sometimes the
> > machine needed a full cold reboot rather than just a warm reboot. If I
> > remember correctly, the warm reboot was just a reset as compared to the cold
> > reboot which was a shutdown, wait a little bit and then restart the LRT.
> > Some of the problems with the LRT's could only be solved with a cold reboot.
> > I think now Target already has a sucessor that they use to this technology
> > but interesting to me just the same. I had no idea that it was relevant with
> > plain old computers as well.
> >
> >
> >
> > "Bill in Co." wrote:
> > > It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots. Just one
> > > cold reboot.
> >
> > > Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > > > Huh? Turning off the machine then back on isn't any different than a
> > > reboot.
> > > > When you delete ShellIconCache, it isn't rebuilt until the second shut
> > > down
> > > > or reboot, whichever you choose, no matter how you get it to that point.
> >
> > > > --
> > > > Gary S. Terhune
> > > > MS-MVP Shell/User
> > > >www.grystmill.com
> >
> > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_h...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > >news:u1p9cTE5HHA.5796@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > > >> lb wrote:
> > > >>> On Aug 21, 3:19 pm, H...@invalid.com wrote:
> > > >>>> This is Win98se
> > > >>>> For some reason there is some icon confusion going on. For example, I
> > > >>>> have a program called "Hosts Toggle" (to turn on and off the hosts
> > > >>>> file). Right now, all files with the PDF extension have the icon from
> > > >>>> "Hosts Toggle". Text files (.txt) have an icon from another program
> > > >>>> instead of the notepad icon.
> >
> > > >>>> The next time I reboot, the icons will be different and some other
> > > >>>> extension will have the wrong icon, for example last night all the
> > > >>>> .jpg files had an icon from another folder on my desktop.
> >
> > > >>>> Everything else is working fine. Why is this happeningt and how do I
> > > >>>> fix it?
> >
> > > >>>> Thanks
> > > >>>> HN
> >
> > > >>> If you have TweakUI, you can go to the repair tab and repair the
> > > >>> icons.
> >
> > > >>> Your shelliconcache file may be too small or damaged. You can delete
> > > >>> it and windows will make a new one on the 2nd boot.
> >
> > > >> Or just turn off the computer, and then turn it on a few seconds later,
> > > >> and
> > > >> you won't have to reboot twice - or thrice (possibly).
> >
> > > >>> You can increase the size with programs such as Cacheman or X Setup.
> > > >>> Both of these have older free versions. Post if you do not have any
> > > >>> of these.
> >
> > > >>> Another thing is that if you are using a desktop shortcut to rapidly
> > > >>> shutdown windows, stop using it as it prevents your shelliconcache
> > > >>> from being rewritten properly.
> >
> > > >> Not for me it doesn't (and hasn't). I've had a desktop shortcut for
> > > >> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL).- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I wonder if the original poster ever got their problem fixed!
>
>

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is all
the reset button does, then how come the video and sound (and every other
device I can think of that connects to the motherboard, including onboard
video, RAM and LPT port) reset also?

Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable data
remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the case. Use a
floppy-based debug and reset the machine from within Windows, both using
Shutdown>Restart and a hard reset.

Anyway, when I get the time, I'll research and see if I can't find a
step-by-step description of what happens.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:e3$9xhr5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:OLaVzxp5HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>> What makes the data random?
>>>
>>> The question is a bit backwards. Why wouldn't it be random? More on
>>> that below.
>>>
>>>> The loss of a "table of contents"? How does
>>>> removing power randomize the data if it doesn't change the bits?
>>>
>>> Where did THAT come from? There are no "bits", per se, when the
>>> power
>>> is off. It has nothing to do with a table of contents. Memory cells
> can
>>> store a logic 1 or a logic 0, but only when they have power going to
> them.
>>> If you remove the power, the data is gone. By reapplying power, the
>>> cells come up in some pseudorandom state, since they haven't had
>>> anything
>>> written into their cells yet.
>>
>> OK, memory cells are either 0 or 1.
>
> ONLY when power is applied to the chip. Then, and then only.
>
>> That their unpowered sate is random
>
> No, not their unpowered state. In their "repowered up" state. There
> is
> a crucial distinction here. (In the unpowered state the whole statement
> is meaningless).
>
>> doesn't make sense to me, nor do I see why restoring power would make
>> them
>> randomly be 0's or 1's, but OK. That's one of the things I'd like to see
> in
>> an authoratative article.
>
> Well, why don't you go verify it yourself? By a few static RAM chips,
> apply power, go look at their data outputs as you apply consecutive
> addresses for each cell. Then remove power (the requisite power supply
> voltage(s) to the IC so it can operate), then reapply power, and repeat
> the
> experiment. Small static CMOS RAM chips aren't that expensive (ones
> you
> can use for these experiments like in school labs).
>
> OR
>
> Use debug to examine a bunch of random memory locations for RAM in your
> computer and print the screen for this. Then turn off the computer,
> wait
> a few seconds, and then turn it back on it again, and go check out those
> same addresses again (and do this for a significant number of completely
> scattered RAM address banks).
>
>>>> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather
> than
>>>> random?
>>>
>>> The question is backwards. Why would they come up as all ones or all
>>> zeroes? They're not all identical! Just like snowflakes, there are
>>> individual differences. Just like white noise consists of a mix of
>>> random frequencies. (A whole slew of them, actually).
>>
>> I don't buy that, but if you can show me some documentation... Memory
> cells
>> are randomly positive or negative in charge absent power? I don't know a
> lot
>> about the subject, but it's counter intuitive.
>
> See above (and more below).
>
>>>> Resetting (whether manually or programmatically) certainly appears to
>>>> interrupt the power to the video card, the sound card, the hard
> drives...
>>>> Why not to the RAM?
>>>
>>> The only way to interrupt the power to anything is to *remove* the
>>> power,
>>> which is done by turning the computer or appliance off. And the power
>>> supply voltage goes to zero.
>>
>> And I say that when you do a reset, whether by pushing the reset button
>> or
>> via an electronic signal, the power to the motherboard (in AT boards) IS
>> momentarily cut, disrupting the power between the PWS and the mobo.
>
> The only way to remove power (the power supply voltages) from all the IC's
> on your motherboard and cards is to turn off the power (unless you have a
> switch that actually turns off its power and kills it).
>
> Pushing a reset switch is (or used to be) an action that toggles or
> switches
> the reset line pin on the microprocessor. Microprocessors have a
> hardware
> reset pin, which, when momentarily grounded, resets the microprocessor IC,
> and sends it into its microcoded reset routine, by its sending out some
> predefined addresses to the address bus).
>
>> Makes a
>> lot more sense to me than your contention. If not, please explain how the
>> devices ARE reset. Some complicated signal sent to each one to reset,
> while
>> the mobo remains alive? Again, I'd like to see authoritative
> documentation,
>> both for AT and ATX boards, though we can stick to AT if you wish.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:ueTGTqo5HHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Well, I've worked with electronics (and am an EE) all these years, as
>>>>> you
>>>>> probably know, so at least that part just seems so evident to me
> (probably
>>>>> from doing this kinda stuff in the lab for sooo many years, lol).
>>>>>
>>>>> I used the term pseudorandom, as I'm pretty sure it (the data contents
>>>>> of
>>>>> the RAM) is not completely statistically random, that's all.
>>>>>
>>>>> When you reboot your computer, you are NOT removing power from the RAM
>>>>> chip, like you are when you turn it off. And THAT is a critical
>>>>> difference (in terms of the contents of the RAM cells).
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether that becomes, or can become, problematic, in some cases, is a
>>>>> separate issue. .
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>> OK, I don't know. But what makes the data in RAM change from
>>>>>> organized
> to
>>>>>> pseudo-random? Regardless, what I believe is that this behavior isn't
>>>>>> changed by shutting down and then starting, as opposed to resetting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:uCaQjSo5HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't buy this "data remains in RAM" or "some of the data remains
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> RAM" or even that it becomes random. Here's the way I look at it,
> based
>>>>>>>> upon observation and deductive logic. RAM is kept alive by
> electricity.
>>>>>>>> No electricity, the ones turn to zeros (or vice versa, but it isn't
>>>>>>>> random.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me get this straight. You think that when you turn the
> computer
>>>>>>> back
>>>>>>> on, the RAM contents are either all ones or all zeros? No way,
>>>>>>> Jose!
>>>>>>> Go take a peek sometime using debug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you take a RAM IC, and power it up (like on a breadboard), the
>>>>>>> contents of its memory locations will be pseudorandom, and will NOT
> be
>>>>>>> all ones or
>>>>>>> all zeroes!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's
>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>> reason to keep the RAM alive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's not really a question of "alive" or "dead" (some misleading
>>>>>>> terminology
>>>>>>> here).
>>>>>>> Well, ok, technically, if you want to use the term "dead" here, that
>>>>>>> would only apply when power is removed from the RAM chip. We can
>>>>>>> agree that then, and then only, is it dead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the
>>>>>>>> electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which means
> that
>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it does NOT remain in the last used state (the contents or data
> in
>>>>>>> the RAM cells, I mean). But that IS true for ROM, obviously!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if you shut down, the data is retained. It's one or the other.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On an AT board, pushing the reset button momentarily cuts the power
>>>>>>>> supply
>>>>>>>> to the entire system (except that part that's kept alive by the
>>>>>>>> CMOS
>>>>>>>> battery.) AFAICT, a restart accomplishes the same thing via
>>>>>>>> electronic
>>>>>>>> means.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With ATX boards, parts of the system are kept alive, to support
>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>> like Wake-On LAN. But only those parts that are necessary to keep
> alive
>>>>>>>> while
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> machine is "turned off." RAM isn't one of those components.
> Resetting
>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> restarting does the same thing to all the rest of the components as
>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>> does in an AT board -- momentarily cuts power to those components
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> reset them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But maybe I'm totally wrong, I don't know. Again, if you can find a
>>>>>>>> reputable resource that describes all these functions in technical
>>>>>>>> detail,
>>>>>>>> something that takes you through exactly what happens at every step
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> startup, shutdown, manual reset and programmatic reset, I'd be very
>>>>>>>> interested. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but if so, I want the real
>>>>>>>> story,
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> anecdotal evidence or simplistic articles that don't walk me
>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> processes. I thought I saw a link in this thread to an article that
>>>>>>>> claimed the same thing you do, but I can't find it now. I did take
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> quick glance at it, but it didn't offer any more explanation than
> you
>>>>>>>> have, nor did I recognize it as an established technical resource.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd do it myself, but I have a lot on my plate for the next few
>>>>>>>> weeks.
>>>>>>>> Maybe PCGuide explains it. But I figure since you made the claim,
> and
>>>>>>>> perhaps have more free time than I do, you'd be willing to find the
>>>>>>>> resources and settle it once and for all (at least for us.) If you
> don't
>>>>>>>> want to, that's fine, but I thought you might be willing. I won't
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> here for a good ten days,
>>>>>>>> anyway, and I'll probably have no access to the NGs, though that
>>>>>>>> isn't
>>>>>>>> certain, so there's no hurry, <s>.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (Tired and yawning as I was when I wrote that previous post last
> night,
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> midnight, half an hour after I lay down I was wide awake, worrying
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>> all
>>>>>>>> the things I have to do this weekend in preparation for a busy trip
> out
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> town next week. Go figure.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:u6XQyNi5HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> I'm usually up a bit late - I'm kinda a nite owl.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> What makes you say that? I'm serious. I want a reputable cite
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> explains it all in gory detail. ATX boards are "kept alive"
>>>>>>>>>> unless
>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> pull the plug or turn off the PWS using a switch (which only some
>>>>>>>>>> have.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't know anything about ATX boards, per se. Maybe ATX boards
>>>>>>>>> never remove power from the RAM when you turn the computer off,
>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>> that sure
>>>>>>>>> seems unlikely, as there's not much point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What about that
>>>>>>>>>> case? According to your logic, even turning the computer off
>>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>> flush RAM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, "flush" RAM is not the correct terminology here. Let me
>>>>>>>>> explain:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Only by turning the computer off will the entire RAM memory
> contents
>>>>>>>>> (with some parts still potentially containing some code or data)
>>>>>>>>> effectively destroyed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So when you turn the computer back on again, the contents of all
> the
>>>>>>>>> RAM will be random to begin with. That can't happen with a
> reboot.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think it is something to take for granted that a
>>>>>>>>>> reboot
>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>> clear RAM, since it resets everything else?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think some of this misunderstanding is due to my misuse of the
>>>>>>>>> term
>>>>>>>>> "clear
>>>>>>>>> RAM" (if i said that term) here, as I explained above.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What use is the data contained
>>>>>>>>>> therein? What reason would the designers have for maintaining
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> data through a reboot?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But rebooting does not wipe out the contents of all the RAM.
> It's
>>>>>>>>> not a question of "trying to maintain the data" - you're missing
>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>> point. It's
>>>>>>>>> rather that some of it is still left there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why wouldn't the juice be momentarily cut from RAM like it
>>>>>>>>>> is for nearly everything else. Or does a reboot even do that at
>>>>>>>>>> all,
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> component?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> AFAIK, rebooting does NOT remove the *power* from all the RAM
> chips.
>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>> if you don't remove the power from the RAM, some of its data
>>>>>>>>> contents
>>>>>>>>> will still remain, (unless you have some program that deliberately
>>>>>>>>> writes data
>>>>>>>>> into all the cells, which would be a separate utility (like to
> check
>>>>>>>>> out the
>>>>>>>>> RAM).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes I want a cite or three. I want to learn more about it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:uDkCodh5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>> Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is
>>>>>>>>>>> completely cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> jest!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again... Cite? Make it a good one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:u3TLi1f5HHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PCR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in
> terminology):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to press any button to restart.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Livingston
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart
> Windows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 98. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree
> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is no different from a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you're wrong, because it does NOT remove any resident code
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> data left
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in memory that could be problematic (in some instances). So
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT "identical", per se, by definition.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, it is also not identical because the internal
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (electronics) has not been powered off and then back on again,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which could have some relevance for both hardware and software
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (low level) issues, in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> some instances).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That all being said, the practical results are so similar in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MOST
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cases
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it probably don't matter too much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D.
>
>

 

[dadiOH]

Gary S. Terhune wrote:

> Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable
> data remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the
> case.

Personally, I have no doubt it does. Or at least used to on old
machines.

Some 25+ years ago I wrote a program (assembler) for Tandy machines
for programmers that were using Basic. I would have liked to just
stick it on a floppy and let purchasers copy it off but I could
not...there were numerous DOSes and some began counting at one, others
zero. My program needed to change itself internally accomodate the
way the DOS counted and to do that I neeeded the DOS to create my
program file on the user's disc by saving it from RAM.

I wrote a mini-DOS and had it on the distribution disc. It booted the
user machine and displayed an option menu so that the user could
select desired program modules. Those selected were written to RAM
(higher than user DOS would use) and the user was instructed to use
Debug and GOTO the RAM execution address of my program after his
machine rebooted. Once he had a DOS disc in the drive I rebooted it,
he did the DEBUG thing and my program then used his DOS to write the
program file on his disc. Convoluted but it worked. Users were a bit
more savvy back then

I see no reason why things would have changed on PCs as far as the
contents of memory not being changed by a reset but I don't know. The
POST verifies memory but I don't know *how* the verify is done
now-a-days. Used to be a verify would read, write back what it read
then read again and compare the two reads. If that is the case, it
isn't changing RAM values.

Even though a reset probably leaves RAM alone I don't see what
difference it makes. As I've been telling the Rocky Mountain man. He
seems to be worried about malignant code left in RAM executing after a
reset but I can't figure a *way* for it to execute (other than the
ones I posted elsewhere in this thread). If there is a way, I'd sure
like to know how.


--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Bill in Co.]

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is
all
> the reset button does, then how come the video and sound (and every other
> device I can think of that connects to the motherboard, including onboard
> video, RAM and LPT port) reset also?

Actually, resetting the CPU will invoke a software routine to reset the rest
of the devices, because when the CPU reset line is grounded, the internal
microcoded program in the CPU's ROM tells it to send out a sequence of
addresses which then address some memory locations which contain the reset
hardware routines, etc.

> Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable data
> remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the case. Use a
> floppy-based debug and reset the machine from within Windows, both using
> Shutdown>Restart and a hard reset.
>
> Anyway, when I get the time, I'll research and see if I can't find a
> step-by-step description of what happens.
>
> --
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> www.grystmill.com
>
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:e3$9xhr5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:OLaVzxp5HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>> What makes the data random?
>>>>
>>>> The question is a bit backwards. Why wouldn't it be random? More
on
>>>> that below.
>>>>
>>>>> The loss of a "table of contents"? How does
>>>>> removing power randomize the data if it doesn't change the bits?
>>>>
>>>> Where did THAT come from? There are no "bits", per se, when the
>>>> power
>>>> is off. It has nothing to do with a table of contents. Memory cells
can
>>>> store a logic 1 or a logic 0, but only when they have power going to
them.
>>>> If you remove the power, the data is gone. By reapplying power, the
>>>> cells come up in some pseudorandom state, since they haven't had
>>>> anything
>>>> written into their cells yet.
>>>
>>> OK, memory cells are either 0 or 1.
>>
>> ONLY when power is applied to the chip. Then, and then only.
>>
>>> That their unpowered sate is random
>>
>> No, not their unpowered state. In their "repowered up" state. There
>> is
>> a crucial distinction here. (In the unpowered state the whole
statement
>> is meaningless).
>>
>>> doesn't make sense to me, nor do I see why restoring power would make
>>> them
>>> randomly be 0's or 1's, but OK. That's one of the things I'd like to see
in
>>> an authoratative article.
>>
>> Well, why don't you go verify it yourself? By a few static RAM chips,
>> apply power, go look at their data outputs as you apply consecutive
>> addresses for each cell. Then remove power (the requisite power supply
>> voltage(s) to the IC so it can operate), then reapply power, and repeat
>> the
>> experiment. Small static CMOS RAM chips aren't that expensive (ones
>> you
>> can use for these experiments like in school labs).
>>
>> OR
>>
>> Use debug to examine a bunch of random memory locations for RAM in your
>> computer and print the screen for this. Then turn off the computer,
>> wait
>> a few seconds, and then turn it back on it again, and go check out those
>> same addresses again (and do this for a significant number of completely
>> scattered RAM address banks).
>>
>>>>> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather
than
>>>>> random?
>>>>
>>>> The question is backwards. Why would they come up as all ones or all
>>>> zeroes? They're not all identical! Just like snowflakes, there
are
>>>> individual differences. Just like white noise consists of a mix of
>>>> random frequencies. (A whole slew of them, actually).
>>>
>>> I don't buy that, but if you can show me some documentation... Memory
cells
>>> are randomly positive or negative in charge absent power? I don't know a
lot
>>> about the subject, but it's counter intuitive.
>>
>> See above (and more below).
>>
>>>>> Resetting (whether manually or programmatically) certainly appears to
>>>>> interrupt the power to the video card, the sound card, the hard
drives...
>>>>> Why not to the RAM?
>>>>
>>>> The only way to interrupt the power to anything is to *remove* the
>>>> power,
>>>> which is done by turning the computer or appliance off. And the
power
>>>> supply voltage goes to zero.
>>>
>>> And I say that when you do a reset, whether by pushing the reset button
>>> or
>>> via an electronic signal, the power to the motherboard (in AT boards) IS
>>> momentarily cut, disrupting the power between the PWS and the mobo.
>>
>> The only way to remove power (the power supply voltages) from all the
IC's
>> on your motherboard and cards is to turn off the power (unless you have a
>> switch that actually turns off its power and kills it).
>>
>> Pushing a reset switch is (or used to be) an action that toggles or
>> switches
>> the reset line pin on the microprocessor. Microprocessors have a
>> hardware
>> reset pin, which, when momentarily grounded, resets the microprocessor
IC,
>> and sends it into its microcoded reset routine, by its sending out some
>> predefined addresses to the address bus).
>>
>>> Makes a
>>> lot more sense to me than your contention. If not, please explain how
the
>>> devices ARE reset. Some complicated signal sent to each one to reset,
while
>>> the mobo remains alive? Again, I'd like to see authoritative
documentation,
>>> both for AT and ATX boards, though we can stick to AT if you wish.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>
>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ueTGTqo5HHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Well, I've worked with electronics (and am an EE) all these years, as
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> probably know, so at least that part just seems so evident to me
>>>>>> (probably from doing this kinda stuff in the lab for sooo many years,
>>>>>> lol).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used the term pseudorandom, as I'm pretty sure it (the data
contents
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the RAM) is not completely statistically random, that's all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When you reboot your computer, you are NOT removing power from the
RAM
>>>>>> chip, like you are when you turn it off. And THAT is a critical
>>>>>> difference (in terms of the contents of the RAM cells).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether that becomes, or can become, problematic, in some cases, is a
>>>>>> separate issue. .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>> OK, I don't know. But what makes the data in RAM change from
>>>>>>> organized
>> to
>>>>>>> pseudo-random? Regardless, what I believe is that this behavior
isn't
>>>>>>> changed by shutting down and then starting, as opposed to resetting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:uCaQjSo5HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't buy this "data remains in RAM" or "some of the data
remains
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> RAM" or even that it becomes random. Here's the way I look at it,
>>>>>>>>> based upon observation and deductive logic. RAM is kept alive by
>>>>>>>>> electricity. No electricity, the ones turn to zeros (or vice
versa,
>>>>>>>>> but it isn't random.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let me get this straight. You think that when you turn the
computer
>>>>>>>> back
>>>>>>>> on, the RAM contents are either all ones or all zeros? No way,
>>>>>>>> Jose!
>>>>>>>> Go take a peek sometime using debug.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you take a RAM IC, and power it up (like on a breadboard), the
>>>>>>>> contents of its memory locations will be pseudorandom, and will NOT
be
>>>>>>>> all ones or
>>>>>>>> all zeroes!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's
>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>> reason to keep the RAM alive.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's not really a question of "alive" or "dead" (some misleading
>>>>>>>> terminology
>>>>>>>> here).
>>>>>>>> Well, ok, technically, if you want to use the term "dead" here,
that
>>>>>>>> would only apply when power is removed from the RAM chip. We can
>>>>>>>> agree that then, and then only, is it dead.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the
>>>>>>>>> electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which means
>>>>>>>>> that even
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, it does NOT remain in the last used state (the contents or data
in
>>>>>>>> the RAM cells, I mean). But that IS true for ROM, obviously!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> if you shut down, the data is retained. It's one or the other.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On an AT board, pushing the reset button momentarily cuts the
power
>>>>>>>>> supply
>>>>>>>>> to the entire system (except that part that's kept alive by the
>>>>>>>>> CMOS
>>>>>>>>> battery.) AFAICT, a restart accomplishes the same thing via
>>>>>>>>> electronic
>>>>>>>>> means.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With ATX boards, parts of the system are kept alive, to support
>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>> like Wake-On LAN. But only those parts that are necessary to keep
>>>>>>>>> alive while
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> machine is "turned off." RAM isn't one of those components.
Resetting
>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> restarting does the same thing to all the rest of the components
as
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> does in an AT board -- momentarily cuts power to those components
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> reset them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But maybe I'm totally wrong, I don't know. Again, if you can find
a
>>>>>>>>> reputable resource that describes all these functions in technical
>>>>>>>>> detail,
>>>>>>>>> something that takes you through exactly what happens at every
step
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> startup, shutdown, manual reset and programmatic reset, I'd be
very
>>>>>>>>> interested. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but if so, I want the real
>>>>>>>>> story,
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> anecdotal evidence or simplistic articles that don't walk me
>>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> processes. I thought I saw a link in this thread to an article
that
>>>>>>>>> claimed the same thing you do, but I can't find it now. I did take
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> quick glance at it, but it didn't offer any more explanation than
you
>>>>>>>>> have, nor did I recognize it as an established technical resource.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd do it myself, but I have a lot on my plate for the next few
>>>>>>>>> weeks.
>>>>>>>>> Maybe PCGuide explains it. But I figure since you made the claim,
and
>>>>>>>>> perhaps have more free time than I do, you'd be willing to find
the
>>>>>>>>> resources and settle it once and for all (at least for us.) If you
>>>>>>>>> don't want to, that's fine, but I thought you might be willing. I
>>>>>>>>> won't be
>>>>>>>>> here for a good ten days,
>>>>>>>>> anyway, and I'll probably have no access to the NGs, though that
>>>>>>>>> isn't
>>>>>>>>> certain, so there's no hurry, <s>.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (Tired and yawning as I was when I wrote that previous post last
>>>>>>>>> night, at
>>>>>>>>> midnight, half an hour after I lay down I was wide awake, worrying
>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>> the things I have to do this weekend in preparation for a busy
trip
>>>>>>>>> out of
>>>>>>>>> town next week. Go figure.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:u6XQyNi5HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>> I'm usually up a bit late - I'm kinda a nite owl.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you say that? I'm serious. I want a reputable cite
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> explains it all in gory detail. ATX boards are "kept alive"
>>>>>>>>>>> unless
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> pull the plug or turn off the PWS using a switch (which only
some
>>>>>>>>>>> have.)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know anything about ATX boards, per se. Maybe ATX
boards
>>>>>>>>>> never remove power from the RAM when you turn the computer off,
>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>> that sure
>>>>>>>>>> seems unlikely, as there's not much point.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What about that
>>>>>>>>>>> case? According to your logic, even turning the computer off
>>>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> flush RAM.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, "flush" RAM is not the correct terminology here. Let me
>>>>>>>>>> explain:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Only by turning the computer off will the entire RAM memory
contents
>>>>>>>>>> (with some parts still potentially containing some code or data)
>>>>>>>>>> effectively destroyed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So when you turn the computer back on again, the contents of all
the
>>>>>>>>>> RAM will be random to begin with. That can't happen with a
>>>>>>>>>> reboot.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think it is something to take for granted that a
>>>>>>>>>>> reboot
>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>> clear RAM, since it resets everything else?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think some of this misunderstanding is due to my misuse of the
>>>>>>>>>> term
>>>>>>>>>> "clear
>>>>>>>>>> RAM" (if i said that term) here, as I explained above.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What use is the data contained
>>>>>>>>>>> therein? What reason would the designers have for maintaining
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> data through a reboot?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But rebooting does not wipe out the contents of all the RAM.
>> It's
>>>>>>>>>> not a question of "trying to maintain the data" - you're missing
>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>> point. It's
>>>>>>>>>> rather that some of it is still left there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why wouldn't the juice be momentarily cut from RAM like it
>>>>>>>>>>> is for nearly everything else. Or does a reboot even do that at
>>>>>>>>>>> all,
>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>> component?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK, rebooting does NOT remove the *power* from all the RAM
chips.
>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>> if you don't remove the power from the RAM, some of its data
>>>>>>>>>> contents
>>>>>>>>>> will still remain, (unless you have some program that
deliberately
>>>>>>>>>> writes data
>>>>>>>>>> into all the cells, which would be a separate utility (like to
check
>>>>>>>>>> out the
>>>>>>>>>> RAM).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes I want a cite or three. I want to learn more about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:uDkCodh5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is
>>>>>>>>>>>> completely cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely
>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>> jest!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again... Cite? Make it a good one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:u3TLi1f5HHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PCR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminology): There are three ways to restart a Windows 98
or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 95 computer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to press any button to restart.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Livingston
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 98. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree
with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is no different from a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you're wrong, because it does NOT remove any resident
code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data left
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in memory that could be problematic (in some instances).
So
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT "identical", per se, by definition.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, it is also not identical because the internal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (electronics) has not been powered off and then back on
again,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which could have some relevance for both hardware and
software
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (low level) issues, in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some instances).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That all being said, the practical results are so similar in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MOST
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cases
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it probably don't matter too much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D.

 

[Dan]

Your description makes me pine for the simplicity of early computers with
DOS. Remember when there was IBM DOS competing against Microsoft (MS-DOS).
I also still love to fire up my ancient computer which is an IBM PCjr and
play cartridge games on it like Crossfire where you are a little ship and you
shoot aliens that mutate forms until you eventually kill them. You are on a
grid and it was so much fun to be moving across, fire quickly then move away
so the alien bullet did not hit you. I think the small cartridges only had a
maximum of 64 K. King's Quest 1 in 1984 by Sierra had a 5.25 black floppy
disk and was a really enjoyable adventure game for me. The IBM PCjr was so
powerful for its time. I loved using the BASIC cartridge and writing simple
programs to play sounds and flash colors on the screen. Games eventually
became too advanced for it and time moved on. The next computer my dad
bought was a 286. This was a great computer and could do so much. We have
since given this old machine away. My next computer was a 486 and this one I
still have set up at my folk's house and it plays games like Zeliard that are
really a lot of fun. I have a Roland MT-32 hooked up to this computer and it
makes for great game playing. I really miss the lack of great musical scores
in modern games. The Roland MT-32 did not have voice but it did an awesome
job with music and was a gift from my grandmother. She has since passed away
but I still enjoying playing games on that machine like Hero's Quest 1 <now
Quest for Glory 1 -- due to copyright issues I think> As the Hero, you would
go into battle and fight monsters like a Troll and a Cheetaur. The Cheetaur
was like a horse but had claws, face and tail like a cats. It was lots of
fun.

"dadiOH" wrote:

> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable
> > data remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the
> > case.
>
> Personally, I have no doubt it does. Or at least used to on old
> machines.
>
> Some 25+ years ago I wrote a program (assembler) for Tandy machines
> for programmers that were using Basic. I would have liked to just
> stick it on a floppy and let purchasers copy it off but I could
> not...there were numerous DOSes and some began counting at one, others
> zero. My program needed to change itself internally accomodate the
> way the DOS counted and to do that I neeeded the DOS to create my
> program file on the user's disc by saving it from RAM.
>
> I wrote a mini-DOS and had it on the distribution disc. It booted the
> user machine and displayed an option menu so that the user could
> select desired program modules. Those selected were written to RAM
> (higher than user DOS would use) and the user was instructed to use
> Debug and GOTO the RAM execution address of my program after his
> machine rebooted. Once he had a DOS disc in the drive I rebooted it,
> he did the DEBUG thing and my program then used his DOS to write the
> program file on his disc. Convoluted but it worked. Users were a bit
> more savvy back then
>
> I see no reason why things would have changed on PCs as far as the
> contents of memory not being changed by a reset but I don't know. The
> POST verifies memory but I don't know *how* the verify is done
> now-a-days. Used to be a verify would read, write back what it read
> then read again and compare the two reads. If that is the case, it
> isn't changing RAM values.
>
> Even though a reset probably leaves RAM alone I don't see what
> difference it makes. As I've been telling the Rocky Mountain man. He
> seems to be worried about malignant code left in RAM executing after a
> reset but I can't figure a *way* for it to execute (other than the
> ones I posted elsewhere in this thread). If there is a way, I'd sure
> like to know how.
>
>
> --
>
> dadiOH
> ____________________________
>
> dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
> ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
> LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
> Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
>
>
>
>

 

[Dan]

Wow, Bill in Co., you really know a lot about computer hardware and how it
works! I am quite impressed and pleased that you are willing to share your
information with all of us. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

"Bill in Co." wrote:

> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> > I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is
> all
> > the reset button does, then how come the video and sound (and every other
> > device I can think of that connects to the motherboard, including onboard
> > video, RAM and LPT port) reset also?
>
> Actually, resetting the CPU will invoke a software routine to reset the rest
> of the devices, because when the CPU reset line is grounded, the internal
> microcoded program in the CPU's ROM tells it to send out a sequence of
> addresses which then address some memory locations which contain the reset
> hardware routines, etc.
>
> > Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable data
> > remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the case. Use a
> > floppy-based debug and reset the machine from within Windows, both using
> > Shutdown>Restart and a hard reset.
> >
> > Anyway, when I get the time, I'll research and see if I can't find a
> > step-by-step description of what happens.
> >
> > --
> > Gary S. Terhune
> > MS-MVP Shell/User
> > www.grystmill.com
> >
> > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:e3$9xhr5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> >> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>> news:OLaVzxp5HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>> What makes the data random?
> >>>>
> >>>> The question is a bit backwards. Why wouldn't it be random? More
> on
> >>>> that below.
> >>>>
> >>>>> The loss of a "table of contents"? How does
> >>>>> removing power randomize the data if it doesn't change the bits?
> >>>>
> >>>> Where did THAT come from? There are no "bits", per se, when the
> >>>> power
> >>>> is off. It has nothing to do with a table of contents. Memory cells
> can
> >>>> store a logic 1 or a logic 0, but only when they have power going to
> them.
> >>>> If you remove the power, the data is gone. By reapplying power, the
> >>>> cells come up in some pseudorandom state, since they haven't had
> >>>> anything
> >>>> written into their cells yet.
> >>>
> >>> OK, memory cells are either 0 or 1.
> >>
> >> ONLY when power is applied to the chip. Then, and then only.
> >>
> >>> That their unpowered sate is random
> >>
> >> No, not their unpowered state. In their "repowered up" state. There
> >> is
> >> a crucial distinction here. (In the unpowered state the whole
> statement
> >> is meaningless).
> >>
> >>> doesn't make sense to me, nor do I see why restoring power would make
> >>> them
> >>> randomly be 0's or 1's, but OK. That's one of the things I'd like to see
> in
> >>> an authoratative article.
> >>
> >> Well, why don't you go verify it yourself? By a few static RAM chips,
> >> apply power, go look at their data outputs as you apply consecutive
> >> addresses for each cell. Then remove power (the requisite power supply
> >> voltage(s) to the IC so it can operate), then reapply power, and repeat
> >> the
> >> experiment. Small static CMOS RAM chips aren't that expensive (ones
> >> you
> >> can use for these experiments like in school labs).
> >>
> >> OR
> >>
> >> Use debug to examine a bunch of random memory locations for RAM in your
> >> computer and print the screen for this. Then turn off the computer,
> >> wait
> >> a few seconds, and then turn it back on it again, and go check out those
> >> same addresses again (and do this for a significant number of completely
> >> scattered RAM address banks).
> >>
> >>>>> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather
> than
> >>>>> random?
> >>>>
> >>>> The question is backwards. Why would they come up as all ones or all
> >>>> zeroes? They're not all identical! Just like snowflakes, there
> are
> >>>> individual differences. Just like white noise consists of a mix of
> >>>> random frequencies. (A whole slew of them, actually).
> >>>
> >>> I don't buy that, but if you can show me some documentation... Memory
> cells
> >>> are randomly positive or negative in charge absent power? I don't know a
> lot
> >>> about the subject, but it's counter intuitive.
> >>
> >> See above (and more below).
> >>
> >>>>> Resetting (whether manually or programmatically) certainly appears to
> >>>>> interrupt the power to the video card, the sound card, the hard
> drives...
> >>>>> Why not to the RAM?
> >>>>
> >>>> The only way to interrupt the power to anything is to *remove* the
> >>>> power,
> >>>> which is done by turning the computer or appliance off. And the
> power
> >>>> supply voltage goes to zero.
> >>>
> >>> And I say that when you do a reset, whether by pushing the reset button
> >>> or
> >>> via an electronic signal, the power to the motherboard (in AT boards) IS
> >>> momentarily cut, disrupting the power between the PWS and the mobo.
> >>
> >> The only way to remove power (the power supply voltages) from all the
> IC's
> >> on your motherboard and cards is to turn off the power (unless you have a
> >> switch that actually turns off its power and kills it).
> >>
> >> Pushing a reset switch is (or used to be) an action that toggles or
> >> switches
> >> the reset line pin on the microprocessor. Microprocessors have a
> >> hardware
> >> reset pin, which, when momentarily grounded, resets the microprocessor
> IC,
> >> and sends it into its microcoded reset routine, by its sending out some
> >> predefined addresses to the address bus).
> >>
> >>> Makes a
> >>> lot more sense to me than your contention. If not, please explain how
> the
> >>> devices ARE reset. Some complicated signal sent to each one to reset,
> while
> >>> the mobo remains alive? Again, I'd like to see authoritative
> documentation,
> >>> both for AT and ATX boards, though we can stick to AT if you wish.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>
> >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:ueTGTqo5HHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>> Well, I've worked with electronics (and am an EE) all these years, as
> >>>>>> you
> >>>>>> probably know, so at least that part just seems so evident to me
> >>>>>> (probably from doing this kinda stuff in the lab for sooo many years,
> >>>>>> lol).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I used the term pseudorandom, as I'm pretty sure it (the data
> contents
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>> the RAM) is not completely statistically random, that's all.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> When you reboot your computer, you are NOT removing power from the
> RAM
> >>>>>> chip, like you are when you turn it off. And THAT is a critical
> >>>>>> difference (in terms of the contents of the RAM cells).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Whether that becomes, or can become, problematic, in some cases, is a
> >>>>>> separate issue. .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>>>> OK, I don't know. But what makes the data in RAM change from
> >>>>>>> organized
> >> to
> >>>>>>> pseudo-random? Regardless, what I believe is that this behavior
> isn't
> >>>>>>> changed by shutting down and then starting, as opposed to resetting.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> >>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> >>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:uCaQjSo5HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I don't buy this "data remains in RAM" or "some of the data
> remains
> >>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> RAM" or even that it becomes random. Here's the way I look at it,
> >>>>>>>>> based upon observation and deductive logic. RAM is kept alive by
> >>>>>>>>> electricity. No electricity, the ones turn to zeros (or vice
> versa,
> >>>>>>>>> but it isn't random.)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Let me get this straight. You think that when you turn the
> computer
> >>>>>>>> back
> >>>>>>>> on, the RAM contents are either all ones or all zeros? No way,
> >>>>>>>> Jose!
> >>>>>>>> Go take a peek sometime using debug.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If you take a RAM IC, and power it up (like on a breadboard), the
> >>>>>>>> contents of its memory locations will be pseudorandom, and will NOT
> be
> >>>>>>>> all ones or
> >>>>>>>> all zeroes!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's
> >>>>>>>>> no
> >>>>>>>>> reason to keep the RAM alive.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's not really a question of "alive" or "dead" (some misleading
> >>>>>>>> terminology
> >>>>>>>> here).
> >>>>>>>> Well, ok, technically, if you want to use the term "dead" here,
> that
> >>>>>>>> would only apply when power is removed from the RAM chip. We can
> >>>>>>>> agree that then, and then only, is it dead.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the
> >>>>>>>>> electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which means
> >>>>>>>>> that even
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> No, it does NOT remain in the last used state (the contents or data
> in
> >>>>>>>> the RAM cells, I mean). But that IS true for ROM, obviously!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> if you shut down, the data is retained. It's one or the other.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On an AT board, pushing the reset button momentarily cuts the
> power
> >>>>>>>>> supply
> >>>>>>>>> to the entire system (except that part that's kept alive by the
> >>>>>>>>> CMOS
> >>>>>>>>> battery.) AFAICT, a restart accomplishes the same thing via
> >>>>>>>>> electronic
> >>>>>>>>> means.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> With ATX boards, parts of the system are kept alive, to support
> >>>>>>>>> things
> >>>>>>>>> like Wake-On LAN. But only those parts that are necessary to keep
> >>>>>>>>> alive while
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> machine is "turned off." RAM isn't one of those components.
> Resetting
> >>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>> restarting does the same thing to all the rest of the components
> as
> >>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>> does in an AT board -- momentarily cuts power to those components
> >>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> reset them.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But maybe I'm totally wrong, I don't know. Again, if you can find
> a
> >>>>>>>>> reputable resource that describes all these functions in technical
> >>>>>>>>> detail,
> >>>>>>>>> something that takes you through exactly what happens at every
> step
> >>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> startup, shutdown, manual reset and programmatic reset, I'd be
> very
> >>>>>>>>> interested. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but if so, I want the real
> >>>>>>>>> story,
> >>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>> anecdotal evidence or simplistic articles that don't walk me
> >>>>>>>>> through
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> processes. I thought I saw a link in this thread to an article
> that
> >>>>>>>>> claimed the same thing you do, but I can't find it now. I did take
> >>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> quick glance at it, but it didn't offer any more explanation than
> you
> >>>>>>>>> have, nor did I recognize it as an established technical resource.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'd do it myself, but I have a lot on my plate for the next few
> >>>>>>>>> weeks.
> >>>>>>>>> Maybe PCGuide explains it. But I figure since you made the claim,
> and
> >>>>>>>>> perhaps have more free time than I do, you'd be willing to find
> the
> >>>>>>>>> resources and settle it once and for all (at least for us.) If you
> >>>>>>>>> don't want to, that's fine, but I thought you might be willing. I
> >>>>>>>>> won't be
> >>>>>>>>> here for a good ten days,
> >>>>>>>>> anyway, and I'll probably have no access to the NGs, though that
> >>>>>>>>> isn't
> >>>>>>>>> certain, so there's no hurry, <s>.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (Tired and yawning as I was when I wrote that previous post last
> >>>>>>>>> night, at
> >>>>>>>>> midnight, half an hour after I lay down I was wide awake, worrying
> >>>>>>>>> about
> >>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>> the things I have to do this weekend in preparation for a busy
> trip

 

[Bill Blanton]

"dadiOH" <dadiOH@guesswhere.com> wrote in message news:eGxP9t05HHA.4436@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>
>> Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable
>> data remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the
>> case.
>
> Personally, I have no doubt it does. Or at least used to on old
> machines.
>
> Some 25+ years ago I wrote a program (assembler) for Tandy machines
> for programmers that were using Basic. I would have liked to just
> stick it on a floppy and let purchasers copy it off but I could
> not...there were numerous DOSes and some began counting at one, others
> zero. My program needed to change itself internally accomodate the
> way the DOS counted and to do that I neeeded the DOS to create my
> program file on the user's disc by saving it from RAM.
>
> I wrote a mini-DOS and had it on the distribution disc. It booted the
> user machine and displayed an option menu so that the user could
> select desired program modules. Those selected were written to RAM
> (higher than user DOS would use) and the user was instructed to use
> Debug and GOTO the RAM execution address of my program after his
> machine rebooted. Once he had a DOS disc in the drive I rebooted it,
> he did the DEBUG thing and my program then used his DOS to write the
> program file on his disc. Convoluted but it worked. Users were a bit
> more savvy back then
>
> I see no reason why things would have changed on PCs as far as the
> contents of memory not being changed by a reset but I don't know. The
> POST verifies memory but I don't know *how* the verify is done
> now-a-days. Used to be a verify would read, write back what it read
> then read again and compare the two reads. If that is the case, it
> isn't changing RAM values.
>
> Even though a reset probably leaves RAM alone I don't see what
> difference it makes. As I've been telling the Rocky Mountain man. He
> seems to be worried about malignant code left in RAM executing after a
> reset but I can't figure a *way* for it to execute (other than the
> ones I posted elsewhere in this thread). If there is a way, I'd sure
> like to know how.

From "Ralf Brown's interrupt list".

Located in the BIOS data area stored in volatile RAM.

----------M00400067--------------------------
MEM 0040h:0067h - RESET RESTART ADDRESS
Size: DWORD
Desc: this address stores the address at which to resume execution after a
CPU reset (or jump to F000h:FFF0h) when certain magic values are
stored at 0040h:0072h or in CMOS RAM location 0Fh
SeeAlso: MEM 0040h:0072h,MEM F000h:FFF0h,CMOS 0Fh,INT 19

----------M00400072--------------------------
MEM 0040h:0072h - POST RESET FLAG
Size: WORD
Desc: specify the action the BIOS should take at the beginning of the
power-on self-test when the machine is reset

(Table M019)
Values for POST reset flag:
0000h cold boot
0064h Burn-in mode
1234h to bypass memory test (warm boot)
4321h [PS/2 except Mod 25,30] to preserve memory
5678h [Conv] system suspended
9ABCh [Conv] manufacturing test mode
ABCDh [Conv] POST loop mode


This located in the CMOS RAM

----------R0F--------------------------------
CMOS 0Fh - IBM - RESET CODE (IBM PS/2 "Shutdown Status Byte")

(Table C006)
Values for Reset Code / Shutdown Status Byte:
00h-03h perform power-on reset
00h software reset or unexpected reset
01h reset after memory size check in real/virtual mode
(or: chip set initialization for real mode reentry)
02h reset after successful memory test in real/virtual mode
03h reset after failed memory test in real/virtual mode
04h INT 19h reboot
05h flush keyboard (issue EOI) and jump via 40h:0067h
06h reset (after successful test in virtual mode)
(or: jump via 40h:0067h without EOI)
07h reset (after failed test in virtual mode)
08h used by POST during protected-mode RAM test (return to POST)
09h used for INT 15/87h (block move) support
0Ah resume execution by jump via 40h:0067h
0Bh resume execution via IRET via 40h:0067h
0Bh resume execution via RETF via 40h:0067h
0Ch ???
0Dh-FFh perform power-on reset
--------!------------------------------------

Here's an example that uses all of the above to execute RAM-stored code after a reset.
(scroll half way down the page)
http://www.codebreakers-journal.com/content/view/200/103

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

OK, now after all that, I'm getting the picture, which is all I wanted, <g>.
Thanks.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ui$QWD15HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is
> all
>> the reset button does, then how come the video and sound (and every other
>> device I can think of that connects to the motherboard, including onboard
>> video, RAM and LPT port) reset also?
>
> Actually, resetting the CPU will invoke a software routine to reset the
> rest
> of the devices, because when the CPU reset line is grounded, the internal
> microcoded program in the CPU's ROM tells it to send out a sequence of
> addresses which then address some memory locations which contain the reset
> hardware routines, etc.
>
>> Anyway, I suppose the test of your original contention that usable data
>> remains in RAM after a rest would be to see if that's the case. Use a
>> floppy-based debug and reset the machine from within Windows, both using
>> Shutdown>Restart and a hard reset.
>>
>> Anyway, when I get the time, I'll research and see if I can't find a
>> step-by-step description of what happens.
>>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:e3$9xhr5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:OLaVzxp5HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>> What makes the data random?
>>>>>
>>>>> The question is a bit backwards. Why wouldn't it be random? More
> on
>>>>> that below.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The loss of a "table of contents"? How does
>>>>>> removing power randomize the data if it doesn't change the bits?
>>>>>
>>>>> Where did THAT come from? There are no "bits", per se, when the
>>>>> power
>>>>> is off. It has nothing to do with a table of contents. Memory
>>>>> cells
> can
>>>>> store a logic 1 or a logic 0, but only when they have power going to
> them.
>>>>> If you remove the power, the data is gone. By reapplying power, the
>>>>> cells come up in some pseudorandom state, since they haven't had
>>>>> anything
>>>>> written into their cells yet.
>>>>
>>>> OK, memory cells are either 0 or 1.
>>>
>>> ONLY when power is applied to the chip. Then, and then only.
>>>
>>>> That their unpowered sate is random
>>>
>>> No, not their unpowered state. In their "repowered up" state. There
>>> is
>>> a crucial distinction here. (In the unpowered state the whole
> statement
>>> is meaningless).
>>>
>>>> doesn't make sense to me, nor do I see why restoring power would make
>>>> them
>>>> randomly be 0's or 1's, but OK. That's one of the things I'd like to
>>>> see
> in
>>>> an authoratative article.
>>>
>>> Well, why don't you go verify it yourself? By a few static RAM chips,
>>> apply power, go look at their data outputs as you apply consecutive
>>> addresses for each cell. Then remove power (the requisite power supply
>>> voltage(s) to the IC so it can operate), then reapply power, and repeat
>>> the
>>> experiment. Small static CMOS RAM chips aren't that expensive (ones
>>> you
>>> can use for these experiments like in school labs).
>>>
>>> OR
>>>
>>> Use debug to examine a bunch of random memory locations for RAM in your
>>> computer and print the screen for this. Then turn off the computer,
>>> wait
>>> a few seconds, and then turn it back on it again, and go check out those
>>> same addresses again (and do this for a significant number of completely
>>> scattered RAM address banks).
>>>
>>>>>> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather
> than
>>>>>> random?
>>>>>
>>>>> The question is backwards. Why would they come up as all ones or all
>>>>> zeroes? They're not all identical! Just like snowflakes, there
> are
>>>>> individual differences. Just like white noise consists of a mix of
>>>>> random frequencies. (A whole slew of them, actually).
>>>>
>>>> I don't buy that, but if you can show me some documentation... Memory
> cells
>>>> are randomly positive or negative in charge absent power? I don't know
>>>> a
> lot
>>>> about the subject, but it's counter intuitive.
>>>
>>> See above (and more below).
>>>
>>>>>> Resetting (whether manually or programmatically) certainly appears to
>>>>>> interrupt the power to the video card, the sound card, the hard
> drives...
>>>>>> Why not to the RAM?
>>>>>
>>>>> The only way to interrupt the power to anything is to *remove* the
>>>>> power,
>>>>> which is done by turning the computer or appliance off. And the
> power
>>>>> supply voltage goes to zero.
>>>>
>>>> And I say that when you do a reset, whether by pushing the reset button
>>>> or
>>>> via an electronic signal, the power to the motherboard (in AT boards)
>>>> IS
>>>> momentarily cut, disrupting the power between the PWS and the mobo.
>>>
>>> The only way to remove power (the power supply voltages) from all the
> IC's
>>> on your motherboard and cards is to turn off the power (unless you have
>>> a
>>> switch that actually turns off its power and kills it).
>>>
>>> Pushing a reset switch is (or used to be) an action that toggles or
>>> switches
>>> the reset line pin on the microprocessor. Microprocessors have a
>>> hardware
>>> reset pin, which, when momentarily grounded, resets the microprocessor
> IC,
>>> and sends it into its microcoded reset routine, by its sending out some
>>> predefined addresses to the address bus).
>>>
>>>> Makes a
>>>> lot more sense to me than your contention. If not, please explain how
> the
>>>> devices ARE reset. Some complicated signal sent to each one to reset,
> while
>>>> the mobo remains alive? Again, I'd like to see authoritative
> documentation,
>>>> both for AT and ATX boards, though we can stick to AT if you wish.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:ueTGTqo5HHA.3716@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Well, I've worked with electronics (and am an EE) all these years,
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> probably know, so at least that part just seems so evident to me
>>>>>>> (probably from doing this kinda stuff in the lab for sooo many
>>>>>>> years,
>>>>>>> lol).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used the term pseudorandom, as I'm pretty sure it (the data
> contents
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the RAM) is not completely statistically random, that's all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you reboot your computer, you are NOT removing power from the
> RAM
>>>>>>> chip, like you are when you turn it off. And THAT is a critical
>>>>>>> difference (in terms of the contents of the RAM cells).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whether that becomes, or can become, problematic, in some cases, is
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> separate issue. .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>> OK, I don't know. But what makes the data in RAM change from
>>>>>>>> organized
>>> to
>>>>>>>> pseudo-random? Regardless, what I believe is that this behavior
> isn't
>>>>>>>> changed by shutting down and then starting, as opposed to
>>>>>>>> resetting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:uCaQjSo5HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I don't buy this "data remains in RAM" or "some of the data
> remains
>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>> RAM" or even that it becomes random. Here's the way I look at it,
>>>>>>>>>> based upon observation and deductive logic. RAM is kept alive by
>>>>>>>>>> electricity. No electricity, the ones turn to zeros (or vice
> versa,
>>>>>>>>>> but it isn't random.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let me get this straight. You think that when you turn the
> computer
>>>>>>>>> back
>>>>>>>>> on, the RAM contents are either all ones or all zeros? No way,
>>>>>>>>> Jose!
>>>>>>>>> Go take a peek sometime using debug.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you take a RAM IC, and power it up (like on a breadboard), the
>>>>>>>>> contents of its memory locations will be pseudorandom, and will
>>>>>>>>> NOT
> be
>>>>>>>>> all ones or
>>>>>>>>> all zeroes!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's
>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>> reason to keep the RAM alive.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's not really a question of "alive" or "dead" (some misleading
>>>>>>>>> terminology
>>>>>>>>> here).
>>>>>>>>> Well, ok, technically, if you want to use the term "dead" here,
> that
>>>>>>>>> would only apply when power is removed from the RAM chip. We
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> agree that then, and then only, is it dead.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the
>>>>>>>>>> electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which
>>>>>>>>>> means
>>>>>>>>>> that even
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, it does NOT remain in the last used state (the contents or
>>>>>>>>> data
> in
>>>>>>>>> the RAM cells, I mean). But that IS true for ROM, obviously!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> if you shut down, the data is retained. It's one or the other.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On an AT board, pushing the reset button momentarily cuts the
> power
>>>>>>>>>> supply
>>>>>>>>>> to the entire system (except that part that's kept alive by the
>>>>>>>>>> CMOS
>>>>>>>>>> battery.) AFAICT, a restart accomplishes the same thing via
>>>>>>>>>> electronic
>>>>>>>>>> means.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With ATX boards, parts of the system are kept alive, to support
>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>> like Wake-On LAN. But only those parts that are necessary to keep
>>>>>>>>>> alive while
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> machine is "turned off." RAM isn't one of those components.
> Resetting
>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>> restarting does the same thing to all the rest of the components
> as
>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> does in an AT board -- momentarily cuts power to those components
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> reset them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But maybe I'm totally wrong, I don't know. Again, if you can find
> a
>>>>>>>>>> reputable resource that describes all these functions in
>>>>>>>>>> technical
>>>>>>>>>> detail,
>>>>>>>>>> something that takes you through exactly what happens at every
> step
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> startup, shutdown, manual reset and programmatic reset, I'd be
> very
>>>>>>>>>> interested. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but if so, I want the real
>>>>>>>>>> story,
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>> anecdotal evidence or simplistic articles that don't walk me
>>>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> processes. I thought I saw a link in this thread to an article
> that
>>>>>>>>>> claimed the same thing you do, but I can't find it now. I did
>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> quick glance at it, but it didn't offer any more explanation than
> you
>>>>>>>>>> have, nor did I recognize it as an established technical
>>>>>>>>>> resource.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd do it myself, but I have a lot on my plate for the next few
>>>>>>>>>> weeks.
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe PCGuide explains it. But I figure since you made the claim,
> and
>>>>>>>>>> perhaps have more free time than I do, you'd be willing to find
> the
>>>>>>>>>> resources and settle it once and for all (at least for us.) If
>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> don't want to, that's fine, but I thought you might be willing. I
>>>>>>>>>> won't be
>>>>>>>>>> here for a good ten days,
>>>>>>>>>> anyway, and I'll probably have no access to the NGs, though that
>>>>>>>>>> isn't
>>>>>>>>>> certain, so there's no hurry, <s>.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (Tired and yawning as I was when I wrote that previous post last
>>>>>>>>>> night, at
>>>>>>>>>> midnight, half an hour after I lay down I was wide awake,
>>>>>>>>>> worrying
>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>> the things I have to do this weekend in preparation for a busy
> trip
>>>>>>>>>> out of
>>>>>>>>>> town next week. Go figure.)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:u6XQyNi5HHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm usually up a bit late - I'm kinda a nite owl.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you say that? I'm serious. I want a reputable cite
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> explains it all in gory detail. ATX boards are "kept alive"
>>>>>>>>>>>> unless
>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>> pull the plug or turn off the PWS using a switch (which only
> some
>>>>>>>>>>>> have.)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know anything about ATX boards, per se. Maybe ATX
> boards
>>>>>>>>>>> never remove power from the RAM when you turn the computer off,
>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> that sure
>>>>>>>>>>> seems unlikely, as there's not much point.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What about that
>>>>>>>>>>>> case? According to your logic, even turning the computer off
>>>>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>> flush RAM.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, "flush" RAM is not the correct terminology here. Let me
>>>>>>>>>>> explain:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Only by turning the computer off will the entire RAM memory
> contents
>>>>>>>>>>> (with some parts still potentially containing some code or data)
>>>>>>>>>>> effectively destroyed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So when you turn the computer back on again, the contents of all
> the
>>>>>>>>>>> RAM will be random to begin with. That can't happen with a
>>>>>>>>>>> reboot.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think it is something to take for granted that a
>>>>>>>>>>>> reboot
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> clear RAM, since it resets everything else?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think some of this misunderstanding is due to my misuse of the
>>>>>>>>>>> term
>>>>>>>>>>> "clear
>>>>>>>>>>> RAM" (if i said that term) here, as I explained above.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What use is the data contained
>>>>>>>>>>>> therein? What reason would the designers have for maintaining
>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> data through a reboot?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But rebooting does not wipe out the contents of all the RAM.
>>> It's
>>>>>>>>>>> not a question of "trying to maintain the data" - you're missing
>>>>>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>> point. It's
>>>>>>>>>>> rather that some of it is still left there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why wouldn't the juice be momentarily cut from RAM like it
>>>>>>>>>>>> is for nearly everything else. Or does a reboot even do that at
>>>>>>>>>>>> all,
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>> component?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK, rebooting does NOT remove the *power* from all the RAM
> chips.
>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>> if you don't remove the power from the RAM, some of its data
>>>>>>>>>>> contents
>>>>>>>>>>> will still remain, (unless you have some program that
> deliberately
>>>>>>>>>>> writes data
>>>>>>>>>>> into all the cells, which would be a separate utility (like to
> check
>>>>>>>>>>> out the
>>>>>>>>>>> RAM).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes I want a cite or three. I want to learn more about it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:uDkCodh5HHA.5164@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> completely cleared out is to turn off the computer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Surely
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jest!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again... Cite? Make it a good one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:u3TLi1f5HHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PCR wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminology): There are three ways to restart a Windows 98
> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 95 computer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to press any button to restart.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Livingston
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 98. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree
> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is no different from a cold boot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you're wrong, because it does NOT remove any resident
> code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data left
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in memory that could be problematic (in some instances).
> So
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT "identical", per se, by definition.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition, it is also not identical because the internal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (electronics) has not been powered off and then back on
> again,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which could have some relevance for both hardware and
> software
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (low level) issues, in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some instances).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That all being said, the practical results are so similar in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MOST
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cases
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it probably don't matter too much.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D.
>
>

 

[PCR]

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
news:srouc3pp8sjlhcj05bbbtodgqi3k0vucd7@4ax.com
| On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> put
| finger to keyboard and composed:
|
|>"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
|>news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
|>| Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
|>| There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
|>|
|>| 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
|>
|>That is a cold boot.
|>
|>| 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
|>| have to press any button to restart.
|>
|>This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
|>Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
|>doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98.
|>It restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
|>
|>Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you
|>that it is no different from a cold boot.
|
| A Shutdown -> Restart on my socket 7 box causes the machine to POST
| and test the RAM. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del twice from within Windows
| appears to do the same thing.

There is a Shut Down button in the Ctrl-Alt-Del windows, which I suppose
is the same as Ctrl-Alt-Del hit twice. This does a shutdown alright. I
think it BEST for Windows's housekeeping purposes to use the START
button, Shut Down procedure, though. The Ctrl-Alt-Del method is to be
used in emergency situations only, I believe.

HOWEVER, apart from housekeeping issues during the shutdown, yea, those
two must be the same: the only way to start again is to turn the machine
back on, which must always begin at the same point in BIOS.

| However, a Ctrl-Alt-Del from a DOS
| prompt (in real DOS mode) results in POSTing without a RAM check.

Sheesh! I would want to think this to be the same as the other two, as
far as where BIOS will begin its reboot! I'll have to try that, myself,
then-- as I can't precisely recall what I've seen the 6/7 times I've
done it before. Obviously, Windows doesn't get a chance to trap it when
done in DOS-- but that shouldn't affect what BIOS will do during the
restart!

I must also remember to change my BIOS setting from Quickboot to
Fullboot, which will do the RAM check on this Compaq 7470.

| I suspect that in GUI mode the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo is trapped by
| Windows whereas in DOS mode it is trapped by the BIOS or the 8042
| keyboard controller.

Hmm... I think I see what you are saying... trapping it may not only be
for the purpose of housekeeping before the restart... but, it may
determine where the restart actually begins in BIOS. I don't know... it
doesn't seem right! I'll have to experiment-- I'm not sure I can believe
your eyes, Zabcar!

|>| 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
|>| restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
|>| supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
|>| perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
|>| manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
|>
|>Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same
|>page)...?...
|>
|>"To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
|>process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while
|>clicking the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
|>
|>I intend to try it later!
|
| It works on my machine. AFAICT the GUI is restarted but nothing else
| is touched. I say this because my autoexec.bat file is structured like
| this:
|
| <code that executes before GUI starts>
| win
| <code that executes after GUI terminates>
|
| Neither block of code is executed during the warm restart.

That is true. It goes directly to a DOS-like screen with a blinking
cursor. Shortly, "Windows is now restarting..." is written to the
screen. My own Config.sys & Autoexec.bat are set to print their doings
on the screen-- & it didn't happen!

| BTW, the last block of code is not executed after a Shutdown ->
| Restart, either.

I guess it is not a part of Windows's houskeeping to have Autoexec.bat
regain control during the restart process. I can believe your eyes on
that one!

NOW... I've lost my NET connection. OK, let me do some testing...

Setting BIOS to Fullboot did show a RAM test during boot, just before I
get the chance to enter BIOS Setup. It tested 376 MB, which is what I
have after my onboard video grabs 8 MB. (There is BIOS setting to have
it take fewer.) That is the only additional item I noticed. It appeared
in the upper left corner of the Compaq logo screen. Actually, it is the
ONLY doing of BIOS that this Compaq lets me see!

WELL... for me Ctrl-Alt-Del in DOS... DID show the RAM test. I don't
know why it doesn't happen for you. Are you sure you are seeing the BIOS
RAM test at all-- & not just a similar one that Himem.sys can do with
its "/TESTMEM:ON" parameter?

And there were two short beeps afterwards! NOW I'll have to go look that
up for this Compaq BIOS of 7/25/00 System ROM Family 686S4! It isn't in
my manuals! The beeps aren't there unless I do the RAM check!

| - Franc Zabkar
| --
| Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

 

[dadiOH]

Bill Blanton wrote:
> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@guesswhere.com> wrote

>> Even though a reset probably leaves RAM alone I don't see what
>> difference it makes. As I've been telling the Rocky Mountain man.
>> He seems to be worried about malignant code left in RAM executing
>> after a reset but I can't figure a *way* for it to execute (other
>> than the ones I posted elsewhere in this thread). If there is a
>> way, I'd sure like to know how.
>
> From "Ralf Brown's interrupt list".
>
> Located in the BIOS data area stored in volatile RAM.
>
> ----------M00400067--------------------------
> MEM 0040h:0067h - RESET RESTART ADDRESS
> Size: DWORD
> Desc: this address stores the address at which to resume execution
> after a CPU reset (or jump to F000h:FFF0h) when certain magic
> values are stored at 0040h:0072h or in CMOS RAM location 0Fh

Now I know. Thank you *very* much for that and other info.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Dan]

I need to see if I can find that 98 Secrets book again, PCR. It is currently
most likely in storage. I will look when I have an opportunity again.

"PCR" wrote:

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u3TLi1f5HHA.3940@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl
> | PCR wrote:
> |> "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> |> news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
> |>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
> |>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
> |>>
> |>> 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
> |>
> |> That is a cold boot.
> |>
> |>> 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
> |>> have to press any button to restart.
> |>
> |> This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston
> |> & Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but
> |> it doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows
> |> 98. It restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
> |>
> |> Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you
> |> that it is no different from a cold boot.
> |
> | But you're wrong, because it does NOT remove any resident code or
> | data left in memory that could be problematic (in some instances).
> | So it is NOT "identical", per se, by definition.
>
> I'm thinking...
>
> (a) There is the BIOS RAM check, where all of it is written to
> & read from.
> (b) Even without that, all RAM that will be used is over-written
> with fresh code.
>
> | In addition, it is also not identical because the internal hardware
> | (electronics) has not been powered off and then back on again, which
> | could have some relevance for both hardware and software (low level)
> | issues, in some instances).
>
> Somewhere during the boot, all peripheral devices get control to
> over-write their RAM too, I'm thinking. DON'T make me hit you over the
> head with a 1207 page book, Colorado! (It needs a major defrag & an
> index re-work, or, instead, I'd pore through it for the perfect answer!)
>
> | That all being said, the practical results are so similar in MOST
> | cases that it probably don't matter too much.
>
> I think it likely is identical. Anything in RAM is cleared or
> over-written. But, I'll change my tune-- IF you show me a gory reference
> that hasn't fainted Terhune OR tell me the page to look at in "Windows
> 98 Secrets" (Livingston/Straub)!
>
> | Q.E.D.
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
>
>

 

[Dan]

You mean to say to me, PCR you still have that old Compaq from way back in
the past or is this a new one. You really should just build your machine
next time, PCR. It takes more time but I so much prefer just replacing and
upgrading the parts as needed. It makes my life so much easier and then I am
unique on the Net as compared to just being Dell 590707 and I can create my
own full customized identity with this machine. BTW, lots of lightning over
here 2 nights ago and my ethernet port was fried on my ASUS motherboard but
fortunately everything else was protected my a battery back up. My Dad,
Ivan, bought me a new battery backup and I can use the old one to help
protect the area in the main ethernet room. I live in a house now in
Albuquerque with 3 other guys. Brett is a student at UNM who also works at
Los Alamos and with technology at UNM. Mark is a student. Monty is a
minister for New Covenant Christian Church here in Albuquerque, NM that tries
to reach young University of New Mexico college students for Jesus Christ.
Anyway, back on the topic of computers and how they are so great. <I was
also recently researching and studying more in detail how cell phones work so
I can become more proficient with using them>

"PCR" wrote:

> "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
> news:ucSNyoc5HHA.600@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl
> | "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> | news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
> || Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
> || There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
> ||
> || 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
> |
> | That is a cold boot.
> |
> || 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
> || have to press any button to restart.
> |
> | This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
> | Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
> | doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98.
> | It restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
> |
> | Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you
> | that it is no different from a cold boot.
> |
> || 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
> || restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
> || supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
> || perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
> || manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
> |
> | Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same
> | page)...?...
> |
> | "To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
> | process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while
> | clicking the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
> |
> | I intend to try it later!
>
> UPDATE: Yea, that was it. Instead of going to my Compaq BIOS's jumping
> solid square cursors, it went straight to a blank screen with a single,
> blinking line of a cursor, followed by the message... "Windows is now
> restarting". And indeed it did restart!
>
> || As for the ShellIconCache issue, you have Win98 in front of you (I
> || don't). Why don't you test? Won't hurt anything.
> ||
> || Also, there's a fix for increasing the size of the ShellIconCache.
> || Also creates an item in Folder Options that allows you to choose what
> || size. Here it is:
> || http://www.aumha.org/regfiles.php#icons
> ||
> || --
> || Gary S. Terhune
> || MS-MVP Shell/User
> || www.grystmill.com
> ||
> || "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> || news:%23FaxT%23F5HHA.5844@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> ||> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> ||>> Bull. A "warm" reboot is not a full Restart, if that's what you
> ||>> mean, but a full reboot (one that isn't like the Win95 "soft" or
> ||>> "warm" reboot) is the
> ||>> equivalent of shutting down and restarting. Yes, it's possible to
> ||>> do a soft restart in Windows 98, but it isn't supported and is
> ||>> advised against. You certainly aren't doing that when you click
> ||>> Start>Shutdown>Restart.
> ||>
> ||> OK, but I was trying to distinguish between simply rebooting vs
> ||> shutting down and powering up again, and there sure is a difference
> ||> there! So I don't know what the right terms are then. (Forget
> ||> "warm reboot", then - my
> ||> bad). Maybe one is just called "rebooting", and the other has to
> ||> be laboriously callled "powering up from a cold start", and that's
> ||> all you can
> ||> call it.
> ||>
> ||>> And no, a single shutdown and restart will not rebuild the
> ||>> ShellIconCache,
> ||>> not until the next time you shut down (and you won't see it until
> ||>> you start it again.)
> ||>
> ||> Well, then I musta misrembered this, as I had thought that when I
> ||> deleted the cache and turned the computer off and then on again, the
> ||> cache *was* formed and there on the HD (as seen in windows
> ||> explorer). But maybe you're right and it still takes a reboot
> ||> even after that. I can't recall
> ||> for certain.
> ||>
> ||>> From the time you delete the file, it requires two restarts to
> ||>> see it again, whether you use Shutdown>Restart or Shutdown and
> ||>> manually restart.
> ||>>
> ||>> --
> ||>> Gary S. Terhune
> ||>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> ||>> www.grystmill.com
> ||>> .
> ||>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> ||>> news:es6vEtF5HHA.6024@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> ||>>> It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots.
> ||>>> Just one cold reboot.
> ||>>>
> ||>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> ||>>>> Huh? Turning off the machine then back on isn't any different
> ||>>>> than a reboot. When you delete ShellIconCache, it isn't rebuilt
> ||>>>> until the second shut down or reboot, whichever you choose, no
> ||>>>> matter how you get it to that point.
> ||>>>>
> ||>>>> --
> ||>>>> Gary S. Terhune
> ||>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
> ||>>>> www.grystmill.com
> ||>>>>
> ||>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> ||>>>> news:u1p9cTE5HHA.5796@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> ||>>>>> lb wrote:
> ||>>>>>> On Aug 21, 3:19 pm, H...@invalid.com wrote:
> ||>>>>>>> This is Win98se
> ||>>>>>>> For some reason there is some icon confusion going on. For
> ||>>>>>>> example, I have a program called "Hosts Toggle" (to turn on
> ||>>>>>>> and off the hosts file). Right now, all files with the PDF
> ||>>>>>>> extension have the icon from "Hosts Toggle". Text files
> ||>>>>>>> (.txt) have an icon from another program instead of the
> ||>>>>>>> notepad icon.
> ||>>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>>> The next time I reboot, the icons will be different and some
> ||>>>>>>> other extension will have the wrong icon, for example last
> ||>>>>>>> night all the .jpg files had an icon from another folder on my
> ||>>>>>>> desktop.
> ||>>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>>> Everything else is working fine. Why is this happeningt and
> ||>>>>>>> how do I
> ||>>>>>>> fix it?
> ||>>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>>> Thanks
> ||>>>>>>> HN
> ||>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>> If you have TweakUI, you can go to the repair tab and repair
> ||>>>>>> the icons.
> ||>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>> Your shelliconcache file may be too small or damaged. You can
> ||>>>>>> delete it and windows will make a new one on the 2nd boot.
> ||>>>>>
> ||>>>>> Or just turn off the computer, and then turn it on a few seconds
> ||>>>>> later,
> ||>>>>> and
> ||>>>>> you won't have to reboot twice - or thrice (possibly).
> ||>>>>>
> ||>>>>>> You can increase the size with programs such as Cacheman or X
> ||>>>>>> Setup. Both of these have older free versions. Post if you do
> ||>>>>>> not have any of these.
> ||>>>>>>
> ||>>>>>> Another thing is that if you are using a desktop shortcut to
> ||>>>>>> rapidly shutdown windows, stop using it as it prevents your
> ||>>>>>> shelliconcache from being rewritten properly.
> ||>>>>>
> ||>>>>> Not for me it doesn't (and hasn't). I've had a desktop
> ||>>>>> shortcut for
> ||>>>>> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL).
> |
> | --
> | Thanks or Good Luck,
> | There may be humor in this post, and,
> | Naturally, you will not sue,
> | Should things get worse after this,
> | PCR
> | pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
>
>

 

[Dan]

So when is your last line of code executed, Frank?

"Franc Zabkar" wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> put
> finger to keyboard and composed:
>
> >"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> >news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
> >| Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
> >| There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
> >|
> >| 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
> >
> >That is a cold boot.
> >
> >| 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
> >| have to press any button to restart.
> >
> >This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
> >Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
> >doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98. It
> >restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
> >
> >Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you that
> >it is no different from a cold boot.
>
> A Shutdown -> Restart on my socket 7 box causes the machine to POST
> and test the RAM. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del twice from within Windows
> appears to do the same thing. However, a Ctrl-Alt-Del from a DOS
> prompt (in real DOS mode) results in POSTing without a RAM check.
>
> I suspect that in GUI mode the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo is trapped by
> Windows whereas in DOS mode it is trapped by the BIOS or the 8042
> keyboard controller.
>
> >| 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
> >| restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
> >| supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
> >| perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
> >| manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
> >
> >Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same page)...?...
> >
> >"To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
> >process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while clicking
> >the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
> >
> >I intend to try it later!
>
> It works on my machine. AFAICT the GUI is restarted but nothing else
> is touched. I say this because my autoexec.bat file is structured like
> this:
>
> <code that executes before GUI starts>
> win
> <code that executes after GUI terminates>
>
> Neither block of code is executed during the warm restart.
>
> BTW, the last block of code is not executed after a Shutdown ->
> Restart, either.
>
> - Franc Zabkar
> --
> Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
>

 

[Dan]

I would always do a full boot and never a quick boot, PCR. The benefits of
the full boot are much better. In this day and age it is not worth doing
things too quickly or you are more likely to make mistakes. It seems to be
the case with the computer too in some ways. <grin>

"PCR" wrote:

> "Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
> news:srouc3pp8sjlhcj05bbbtodgqi3k0vucd7@4ax.com
> | On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> put
> | finger to keyboard and composed:
> |
> |>"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
> |>news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
> |>| Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
> |>| There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
> |>|
> |>| 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
> |>
> |>That is a cold boot.
> |>
> |>| 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
> |>| have to press any button to restart.
> |>
> |>This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
> |>Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
> |>doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98.
> |>It restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
> |>
> |>Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you
> |>that it is no different from a cold boot.
> |
> | A Shutdown -> Restart on my socket 7 box causes the machine to POST
> | and test the RAM. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del twice from within Windows
> | appears to do the same thing.
>
> There is a Shut Down button in the Ctrl-Alt-Del windows, which I suppose
> is the same as Ctrl-Alt-Del hit twice. This does a shutdown alright. I
> think it BEST for Windows's housekeeping purposes to use the START
> button, Shut Down procedure, though. The Ctrl-Alt-Del method is to be
> used in emergency situations only, I believe.
>
> HOWEVER, apart from housekeeping issues during the shutdown, yea, those
> two must be the same: the only way to start again is to turn the machine
> back on, which must always begin at the same point in BIOS.
>
> | However, a Ctrl-Alt-Del from a DOS
> | prompt (in real DOS mode) results in POSTing without a RAM check.
>
> Sheesh! I would want to think this to be the same as the other two, as
> far as where BIOS will begin its reboot! I'll have to try that, myself,
> then-- as I can't precisely recall what I've seen the 6/7 times I've
> done it before. Obviously, Windows doesn't get a chance to trap it when
> done in DOS-- but that shouldn't affect what BIOS will do during the
> restart!
>
> I must also remember to change my BIOS setting from Quickboot to
> Fullboot, which will do the RAM check on this Compaq 7470.
>
> | I suspect that in GUI mode the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo is trapped by
> | Windows whereas in DOS mode it is trapped by the BIOS or the 8042
> | keyboard controller.
>
> Hmm... I think I see what you are saying... trapping it may not only be
> for the purpose of housekeeping before the restart... but, it may
> determine where the restart actually begins in BIOS. I don't know... it
> doesn't seem right! I'll have to experiment-- I'm not sure I can believe
> your eyes, Zabcar!
>
> |>| 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
> |>| restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
> |>| supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
> |>| perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
> |>| manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
> |>
> |>Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same
> |>page)...?...
> |>
> |>"To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
> |>process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while
> |>clicking the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
> |>
> |>I intend to try it later!
> |
> | It works on my machine. AFAICT the GUI is restarted but nothing else
> | is touched. I say this because my autoexec.bat file is structured like
> | this:
> |
> | <code that executes before GUI starts>
> | win
> | <code that executes after GUI terminates>
> |
> | Neither block of code is executed during the warm restart.
>
> That is true. It goes directly to a DOS-like screen with a blinking
> cursor. Shortly, "Windows is now restarting..." is written to the
> screen. My own Config.sys & Autoexec.bat are set to print their doings
> on the screen-- & it didn't happen!
>
> | BTW, the last block of code is not executed after a Shutdown ->
> | Restart, either.
>
> I guess it is not a part of Windows's houskeeping to have Autoexec.bat
> regain control during the restart process. I can believe your eyes on
> that one!
>
> NOW... I've lost my NET connection. OK, let me do some testing...
>
> Setting BIOS to Fullboot did show a RAM test during boot, just before I
> get the chance to enter BIOS Setup. It tested 376 MB, which is what I
> have after my onboard video grabs 8 MB. (There is BIOS setting to have
> it take fewer.) That is the only additional item I noticed. It appeared
> in the upper left corner of the Compaq logo screen. Actually, it is the
> ONLY doing of BIOS that this Compaq lets me see!
>
> WELL... for me Ctrl-Alt-Del in DOS... DID show the RAM test. I don't
> know why it doesn't happen for you. Are you sure you are seeing the BIOS
> RAM test at all-- & not just a similar one that Himem.sys can do with
> its "/TESTMEM:ON" parameter?
>
> And there were two short beeps afterwards! NOW I'll have to go look that
> up for this Compaq BIOS of 7/25/00 System ROM Family 686S4! It isn't in
> my manuals! The beeps aren't there unless I do the RAM check!
>
> | - Franc Zabkar
> | --
> | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

 

[Dan]

Perhaps, someone will now start a topic on file associations. It would be of
interest to me.

"Don/Gen" wrote:

> HN,
>
> This happens to me from time to time and I go to Windows
> Explorer/View/Folder Options, click on File Types tab, double click on any
> of the files listed Ex: Adobe Acrobat Document, in the Action window will
> be Open with Acrobat 6.0(your version may be different), click on OK and
> again OK to close out of both windows and your icons should return to
> normal. You have changed nothing but reminded the computer of an OK
> file/icon association. It is quick and easy without any shutdowns or
> restarts.
>
> Don
>
> <HN@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:nnhmc3pr0rv0vpfsvbkaijsr5kibr7v2pc@4ax.com...
> > This is Win98se
> > For some reason there is some icon confusion going on. For example, I
> > have a program called "Hosts Toggle" (to turn on and off the hosts
> > file). Right now, all files with the PDF extension have the icon from
> > "Hosts Toggle". Text files (.txt) have an icon from another program
> > instead of the notepad icon.
> >
> > The next time I reboot, the icons will be different and some other
> > extension will have the wrong icon, for example last night all the
> > .jpg files had an icon from another folder on my desktop.
> >
> > Everything else is working fine. Why is this happeningt and how do I
> > fix it?
> >
> > Thanks
> > HN
>
>
>

 

[dadiOH]

Dan wrote:
> Perhaps, someone will now start a topic on file associations. It
> would be of interest to me.

Why don't you start it by asking a question?

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Curt Christianson]

If I am understanding Franc correctly, I agree with him.

A cold boot either from powering the machine off and then on again, *OR* the
old "Reset" button on older PC's forces a hardware reset. The POST is
complete, including a full RAM count.

A warm boot (Ctrl-Alt-Del) does *not* force a complete hardware reset, and
one also notices that the system RAM is not re-counted.

--
HTH,
Curt

Windows Support Center
www.aumha.org
Practically Nerded,...
http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
news:srouc3pp8sjlhcj05bbbtodgqi3k0vucd7@4ax.com...
| On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> put
| finger to keyboard and composed:
|
| >"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| >news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
| >| Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
| >| There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
| >|
| >| 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
| >
| >That is a cold boot.
| >
| >| 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
| >| have to press any button to restart.
| >
| >This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
| >Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
| >doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98. It
| >restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
| >
| >Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you that
| >it is no different from a cold boot.
|
| A Shutdown -> Restart on my socket 7 box causes the machine to POST
| and test the RAM. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del twice from within Windows
| appears to do the same thing. However, a Ctrl-Alt-Del from a DOS
| prompt (in real DOS mode) results in POSTing without a RAM check.
|
| I suspect that in GUI mode the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo is trapped by
| Windows whereas in DOS mode it is trapped by the BIOS or the 8042
| keyboard controller.
|
| >| 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
| >| restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
| >| supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
| >| perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
| >| manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
| >
| >Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same page)...?...
| >
| >"To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
| >process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while clicking
| >the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
| >
| >I intend to try it later!
|
| It works on my machine. AFAICT the GUI is restarted but nothing else
| is touched. I say this because my autoexec.bat file is structured like
| this:
|
| <code that executes before GUI starts>
| win
| <code that executes after GUI terminates>
|
| Neither block of code is executed during the warm restart.
|
| BTW, the last block of code is not executed after a Shutdown ->
| Restart, either.
|
| - Franc Zabkar
| --
| Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[MEB]

And one more item to consider for this review: during the warm
reboot/ctl-alt-del/Shut Down>Restart, the capacitors are NOT completely
discharged, which in conjunction with ATX *always on* power, leaves
residuals available, and BIOS/CMOS aspects active - As Blanton and others
have posted.

WHEREAS, A complete Shut Down, or holding the reset button for a few seconds
[with an ATX] does provide the necessary clearing.. though there are times
when one must even shut off the Master Power switch [or unplug] to
completely reset [such as a keyboard error - error held in chip controller].

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com
________


"Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAM.Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e78OGBA6HHA.5984@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
| If I am understanding Franc correctly, I agree with him.
|
| A cold boot either from powering the machine off and then on again, *OR*
the
| old "Reset" button on older PC's forces a hardware reset. The POST is
| complete, including a full RAM count.
|
| A warm boot (Ctrl-Alt-Del) does *not* force a complete hardware reset, and
| one also notices that the system RAM is not re-counted.
|
| --
| HTH,
| Curt
|
| Windows Support Center
| www.aumha.org
| Practically Nerded,...
| http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm
|
| "Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in message
| news:srouc3pp8sjlhcj05bbbtodgqi3k0vucd7@4ax.com...
| | On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0400, "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> put
| | finger to keyboard and composed:
| |
| | >"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message
| | >news:ee6leLG5HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
| | >| Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology):
| | >| There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer.
| | >|
| | >| 1. Shutdown, and then restart the machine manually.
| | >
| | >That is a cold boot.
| | >
| | >| 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't
| | >| have to press any button to restart.
| | >
| | >This one is called a "warm boot" by "Windows 98 Secrets" (Livingston &
| | >Straub), p.297... "This option works just like Shut Down does, but it
| | >doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows 98.
It
| | >restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot."
| | >
| | >Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with you
that
| | >it is no different from a cold boot.
| |
| | A Shutdown -> Restart on my socket 7 box causes the machine to POST
| | and test the RAM. Hitting Ctrl-Alt-Del twice from within Windows
| | appears to do the same thing. However, a Ctrl-Alt-Del from a DOS
| | prompt (in real DOS mode) results in POSTing without a RAM check.
| |
| | I suspect that in GUI mode the Ctrl-Alt-Del combo is trapped by
| | Windows whereas in DOS mode it is trapped by the BIOS or the 8042
| | keyboard controller.
| |
| | >| 3. So-called "Warm" or "Soft" restart (not reboot), which only
| | >| restarts Windows, while DOS remains resident. Common in Win95, and
| | >| supported in Win98, mostly for those apps from 95 days that would
| | >| perform such a restart as part of Setup. Yes, it's possible to
| | >| manually do it in Win98, but I forget how.
| | >
| | >Could it be this "undocumented" feature from the book (same
page)...?...
| | >
| | >"To restart Windows 98 quickly without going through the warm reboot
| | >process, mark Restart, and then hold down your Shift key while clicking
| | >the OK button in the Shut Down Windows dialog box."
| | >
| | >I intend to try it later!
| |
| | It works on my machine. AFAICT the GUI is restarted but nothing else
| | is touched. I say this because my autoexec.bat file is structured like
| | this:
| |
| | <code that executes before GUI starts>
| | win
| | <code that executes after GUI terminates>
| |
| | Neither block of code is executed during the warm restart.
| |
| | BTW, the last block of code is not executed after a Shutdown ->
| | Restart, either.
| |
| | - Franc Zabkar
| | --
| | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
|
|

 

[Daave]

dadiOH wrote:
> Dan wrote:
>> Perhaps, someone will now start a topic on file associations. It
>> would be of interest to me.
>
> Why don't you start it by asking a question?

Preferably in a *brand new* thread.

Also, since Microsoft's news server is wacky, have a look at:

http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion/msg/c1f28ea81a7518c7

Also:

http://www.microsoft.com/communitie...&p=1&tid=6329a39e-366d-4bfe-bb9b-075e6c2e6415

(this explains the empty post by unknown!)

P.S. To the OP, I also heartily endorse the IconCache reg fix at
http://www.aumha.org/regfiles.php#icons .