|
One of our machines has recently (04-Nov) begun to misbehave when shutting down.
(PIII-700MHz, 512MB RAM, XP SP2)
When shut down, instead of switching off, it now stalls with a blank desktop background, and a mouse pointer. The mouse pointer can be moved, but hitting C-A-D does nothing (nor does caps/num lock), and if the machine is powered down by pressing the button on the case (not the screen - there are none), it does switch off.
When booting up again, there are no complaints about not shutting down properly etc.
What's likely to cause this? My guess is that something is not closing cleanly, but I'm at a loss to know what this would be. Anyone any clues?
It has Symantec AV Small Business edition installed, and no, there are no recent configuration changes that we're aware of.
Steve S
Developer for hire
|
|
|
|
|
Usually a badly behaving device driver can often cause this, but ...
Check that Symantec hasn't got any issues with your device drivers you have installed, or any programs you have installed. For instance, current version of AVG complains that an older version of Roxio Easy CD/DVD may not be fully compatible and should be updated. This kind of thing could easy be a reason for your PC behaving as is.
modified 1-Aug-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Like I say, nothing changed (except Symantec virus definition file update).
However, having managed to look in the system event logs, there are startup errors relating to ACPI. On further reading, this could be battery failure on the motherboard, which might also cause issues when shutting down. I'll check this out when I'm actually in the same office. I'm around 120 miles away during the week, which makes this kind of sysadmin difficult 
Steve S
Developer for hire
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I could not find a better place to post this query on CP. I wanted to know whether there is any setting to display the complete shortcut names on the desktop. By default windows reduces the names display area and appends '....'. For example. If i have a shortcut with name 'Microsoft SQL Server 2000', then the name displayed is - 'Microsoft SQL ...'
I want to display the complete names.
Hope i am clear with my query.
Thanks
"A good programmer is someone who looks both ways before crossing a one-way street." -- Doug Linder
coolestCoder
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, try to search this feature in windows registry.
|
|
|
|
|
We installed a bunch of new machines and some of our users began experiencing this problem. OS is Windows XP Pro w/all SPs & patches.
[Right Click] on [Start]
Choose [Search]
-- Windows Explorer crashes and the entire shell reboots.
I spent 2 entire days trying to nail down the problem. I have a solution but, still don't know why or what software is causing the crash.
Solution
========
Turn off dual-core in the BIOs.
Does anyone know if there is a software solution to this issue?
Searching the web shows I am not alone but, there are no solutions available. Once it happens on a machine, it always happens. It is definitly based on the install and not on the user. Maybe it is due to the order of install/patching. Something is just not happy with dual processing.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what the problem is. Explorer has crashed once while I was doing a search, but it hasn't happened since.
I have done some research and I have found that if you have McAfee Anti-Virus installed, this may cause the problem. Also, try checking for any Mal-Ware that may be installed on your computers.
If this doesn't work, you might try reinstalling Windows or the Service Pack.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no Mal-Ware present - these are new machines and I tried 3 different spyware removers trying to locate the issue. We do have McAfee installed but, I turned it off trying and resolve the issue. This had no effect.
We are using Office XP 2002, we are thinking a newer version may be more multi-processor friendly. It has not happened on all boxes and Office is the only common software on each and every box.
Reinstalling did work on one box but, we think this is just a crap shoot. Same software/patches installed but possibly in a different order. We are talking 50+ boxes here. It is much easier to turn a switch in the BIOS than start an install from scratch.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Potter wrote: We are talking 50+ boxes here. It is much easier to turn a switch in the BIOS than start an install from scratch.
True. Maybe an upgrade would do the trick.
What processor brand and model are you using?
|
|
|
|
|
Gateway E-6500
3.2ghz Dual Core Intel
Interesting note - while the crash notifcation is on screen (the one that will send info to MS if you desire) you can complete your search without error. Of course, leaving the 'always on-top' crash window up is not a good work around. This leads me to believe that some shell extension is causing the issue and XP is killing the main process that tried to load the erred extension. Once you clear the crash screen - Explorer/shell reboots.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Potter wrote: This leads me to believe that some shell extension is causing the issue and XP is killing the main process that tried to load the erred extension.
That's the first thing I thought when I read your OP. You can see your installed search extensions in HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\explorer\FindExtensions
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I've researched everywhere and I couldn't find anything. Sorry man, wish I could help.
Try upgrading your servers, and if that doesn't work, post again. Maybe I'll find something out that will fix the problem.
Sorry, hope you can fix it.
|
|
|
|
|
Try to check an event viewer in the system node and try to figure out what is cause the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a hard disk with 4 partitions. The first 2 are NTFS and the other two unformatted-RAW. I'm trying to format the 3d one from a Linux disk (ubuntu) and it doesn't even detect the devices. I installed the partitioning software for the ubuntu so it isn't that.
Furthermore the 'fdisk' command from the command line is not accurate.
What am I doing wrong?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
You need to create the partitions as "Linux" (partition-type 82 or 83, if I am not mistaken). Then, with the partitions in place and being listed, you have to format them using the mkfs family of commands (mkfs.ext2 / mkfs.ext3 / mkswap / etc (names MIGHT differ between distributions))
After you have created the filesystem, you can mount the partitions into your linux-system.
If you are preparing a linux-install, and want to use the linux-setup provided by your distribution, the best approach would be to remove both RAW-partitions and then just telling the installer about your preferred partitioning scheme. They usually do a good job for "first-timers".
If your windows-fdisk cannot handle the raw-partitions (i.e. if it is unable to delete these partitions), you could always boot from a LiveCD (like Knoppix or the Ubuntu-LiveCD) and use a Parted-Tool (e.g. qtparted) or a command-line-tool (e.g. cfdisk) to remove them.
Cheers,
Sebastian
--
Contra vim mortem non est medicamen in hortem.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there,
I program in Visual Studio 2005 .NET in C++ language.
When I trying to build my project an error occur: "error: PRJ0015. The null device is missing from your system. we are unable to launch a build."
anything I did don't help ...
Please tell me what is the NULL device and I can I install it if it is missing.
Thank you very much,
Reuven
|
|
|
|
|
|
I want ot purchase a genuine version of MS Windows XP Professional Ed. I have two desktop PCs and one laptop - the hardware of all of them are compatible for WinXP Pro installation. Now I want to know with one copy of WinXP Pro can I install the OS in all the three systems and all three copies will be legal or I have to purchase three different WinXP Pro CD to avoid installing illegal copies of WinXP Pro. Also what happens if (say) one of the PC's hardware is changed and after that when I install the OS from the purchased WinXP Pro CD again, will there be a message displaying I have installed an illegal copy of the OS (even though the OS is a genuine one, purchased from an authorised Microsoft Vendor)?
-- modified at 2:16 Sunday 29th October, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
frontend wrote: Now I want to know with one copy of WinXP Pro can I install the OS in all the three systems and all three copies will be legal or I have to purchase three different WinXP Pro CD to avoid installing illegal copies of WinXP Pro.
No, you need a license for every computer.
frontend wrote: Also what happens if (say) one of the PC's hardware is changed and after that when I install the OS from the purchased WinXP Pro CD again, will there be a message displaying I have installed an illegal copy of the OS (even though the OS is a genuine one, purchased from an authorised Microsoft Vendor)?
Enter M$ support......
|
|
|
|
|
Ignoring WGA attempting to enforce the letter of the law instead of just the spirit you could buy 3 copies, install it once, and ghost the drive image onto the second and 3rd pcs.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have installed 4GB of memory in my system and windows xp is recognising only 3GB of it. How can I make it to recognise and use the full 4GB??
-Pavan
|
|
|
|
|
pavanbabut wrote: I have installed 4GB of memory in my system and windows xp is recognising only 3GB of it.
As far as I know, windows xp recognize 4gb as the maximum memory. In my opinion, the reason that your memory see only 3Gb because you might share your memory with your VGA card or other device that need to share with this memory. Check your computer CMOS for more information.
|
|
|
|
|
But do ya think that for video and peripherals ROM, it takes 1GB?? I am sure that I have allocated 256MB of RAM to one of my framegrabber card and my graphics card is having on board memory of 256MB. I read a lot on PAE and /3GB options in windows and I tried all those with no luck.
-Pavan
|
|
|
|
|
User applications under XP can only use a max of 3GB. The remaining 1GB is reserved for the Windows kernel.
Dave Kreskowiak
Microsoft MVP - Visual Basic
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't that area reserved for PCI? AFAIR, that is why the area is "hidden" by Windows: The kernel protecting the PCI addresses.
If I am mistaken, please give me some feedback.
Cheers,
Sebastian
--
Contra vim mortem non est medicamen in hortem.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
