system freeze as Youtube web page loads

Over the last three days, I've tried to access two separate youtube
links on two separate occasions to find the W98 system freezes as the
page is initially displayed. No keybd/mouse response. Required a
hardware reboot to recover. I don't normally access youtube, but had
done so in the previous week without problems.

First link was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZM779jJJFo

The first time the problem occurred, I did a quick disk check - lost
clusters found (and repaired).

I retried the same link with number crunching background activity
disabled - with the same result. Repeated disk check and then
attempted to run defrag - incomplete after hitting a bad sector. This
was repaired by running a complete disk check, including the surface
test, after which the defrag would complete.

Retried the link a third time with number crunching disabled - with
the same result. Disk checked again without errors.

The failed attempt to reach a differing Youtube link today (same
system freeze), suggests that the problem wasn't going away by itself.

The browser used is still the older Mozilla 1.7.11 - no changes here
in over a year, and none expected in the future (without migrating to
firefox or seamonkey).

Trying for the same link using IE6 (rarely used but as up to date as
MS permits) I got a blue screen that would not recover but that
allowed a keybd ctrl/alt/del to reboot.

Repeating this (if only to note down the OE exception number) produced
normal performance.....?

Repeating the attempt using default Mozilla then also produced normal
performance.

What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
(-8th year without reinstall)?

Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.

RL

thanatoid
Sun Apr 27 21:38:56 PDT 2008

legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in
news:osfa141356g4lid5seerjdla8h6am9u997@4ax.com:

<SNIP>

> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this
> W98 2ed OS (-8th year without reinstall)?

I would recommend running NOTHING else and using Opera to access
although it will probably work OK with any browser if given its
space to "bloat your machine up to capacity". I have a 10½
166MHz running 95B and I have no problems with accessing the
site. The flv's get saved as .tmp files in the Opera cache
directory (needless to say I cannot watch them on this machine,
I have another 2GHz machine which I use for music editing, video
etc.).

AFA UT, I grabbed a few nostalgic music videos and the rest of
it can go to hell.

> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.

I would also recommend forgetting youtube exists.
I hate the fucking web.

You MIGHT want to consider running a factory diagnostic utility
on your 8-year old hard drive and possibly getting a new one and
doing a fresh install of the OS and the programs you know after
8 years that you will actually USE. 8 years is a LONG time for a
HD and for Windows without a full reinstall or at least a clean
image reinstall (Ghost or Acronis TrueImage).

--
Of course, it is no easy matter to be polite; in so far, I mean,
as it requires us to show great respect for everybody, whereas
most people deserve none at all; and again in so far as it
demands that we should feign the most lively interest in people,
when we must be very glad that we have nothing to do with them.

- Arthur Schopenhauer

philo
Mon Apr 28 04:34:30 PDT 2008


"legg" <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in message
news:osfa141356g4lid5seerjdla8h6am9u997@4ax.com...
>
> Over the last three days, I've tried to access two separate youtube
> links on two separate occasions to find the W98 system freezes as the
> page is initially displayed. No keybd/mouse response. Required a
> hardware reboot to recover. I don't normally access youtube, but had
> done so in the previous week without problems.
>
> First link was:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZM779jJJFo
>
> The first time the problem occurred, I did a quick disk check - lost
> clusters found (and repaired).
>
> I retried the same link with number crunching background activity
> disabled - with the same result. Repeated disk check and then
> attempted to run defrag - incomplete after hitting a bad sector. This
> was repaired by running a complete disk check, including the surface
> test, after which the defrag would complete.
>
> Retried the link a third time with number crunching disabled - with
> the same result. Disk checked again without errors.
>
> The failed attempt to reach a differing Youtube link today (same
> system freeze), suggests that the problem wasn't going away by itself.
>
> The browser used is still the older Mozilla 1.7.11 - no changes here
> in over a year, and none expected in the future (without migrating to
> firefox or seamonkey).
>
> Trying for the same link using IE6 (rarely used but as up to date as
> MS permits) I got a blue screen that would not recover but that
> allowed a keybd ctrl/alt/del to reboot.
>
> Repeating this (if only to note down the OE exception number) produced
> normal performance.....?
>
> Repeating the attempt using default Mozilla then also produced normal
> performance.
>
> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
> (-8th year without reinstall)?
>
> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
>


Are you using dial-up or DSL/cable ???

First off. If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest you replace it.

Secondly, I generally suggest a RAM test to rule out the possibility of bad
H/W causing the problem.

Since there are a number of small, light browsers out there, you may want to
try a few and see if any of them are more reliable.

If not, then there are deeper issues. (Which I suspect)

Gary
Mon Apr 28 07:55:22 PDT 2008

LOST CLUSTERS DO NOT MEAN A BAD HARD DRIVE!!!!!

The rest of philo's post is worthless, but especially don't believe that
lost clusters means a bad hard drive. PHILO IS A CLASS "A" IDIOT!!!

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

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:uw0pgOSqIHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>
>
> Are you using dial-up or DSL/cable ???
>
> First off. If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest you replace it.
>
> Secondly, I generally suggest a RAM test to rule out the possibility of
> bad
> H/W causing the problem.
>
> Since there are a number of small, light browsers out there, you may want
> to
> try a few and see if any of them are more reliable.
>
> If not, then there are deeper issues. (Which I suspect)
>
>

legg
Mon Apr 28 08:16:46 PDT 2008

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:34:30 -0500, "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

>> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
>> (-8th year without reinstall)?
>>
>> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
>>
>
>
>Are you using dial-up or DSL/cable ???
>
>First off. If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest you replace it.
>
>Secondly, I generally suggest a RAM test to rule out the possibility of bad
>H/W causing the problem.
>
>Since there are a number of small, light browsers out there, you may want to
>try a few and see if any of them are more reliable.
>
>If not, then there are deeper issues. (Which I suspect)

It's DSL.

What about the 'self-correcting' behavior exhibited by OS after
running IE ? The fact that both browsers finally ran, after being
dysfunctional at the specific task for a week?

Is the flash utility used by both browsers being somehow straightened
out by IE6, even though it also crashed first time around?

This was the first time I'd ever seen a surface scan detect trouble on
ANY machine's hard drive, not just this one. Previous defrag in March
when it came out of back-up storage to receive and carry the current
OS (cloned from previous current HDD). Only it's third 4-month tour of
duty since purchase two years ago.

Are there any known programs that can mimic the characteristics of a
bad sector, possibly to avoid AV detection or other conventions?

I recently (oct'07- Mar'08) spent a considerable amount of time and
effort transfering to a new OS in a new machine using W2K on SATA HDD,
only to see the new system's NTFS partition crash and burn during a
'repair' operation, in its first 3 months of actual use as primary.

RL

Gary
Mon Apr 28 08:58:35 PDT 2008

The "lost clusters" likely happened because a file was in the middle of
being written when the crash occurred. Part of the file didn't get written,
and the part that did get written became lost clusters. Lost clusters also
frequently occur as a side-effect of cross-linked files (where head of file
one gets attached to tail of file two, leaving behind the rest of the two
files as lost clusters. They get fixed by deleting the info on the clusters
and adjusting that part of the FAT involved to show that the clusters are
available.

There are a couple of problems with lost clusters: 1. Was the data that got
lost (leaving lost clusters behind) and/or the data in the lost clusters
themselves, important. When Scandisk fixes lost clusters, you have the
choice of saving the data in CHK files. Unfortunately, when Scandisk runs
automatically after a bad shutdown, Microsoft's stupid default setting was
to delete the lost clusters without saving CHK files. This setting should be
changed in SCANDISK.INI (at the very bottom of the file.) The action should
be Save, not Delete.

I cannot explain the behavior of YouTube except that perhaps problems with
the Cache(s). Have you checked with YouTube Help to see if there isn't
something known there?

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

"legg" <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in message
news:osfa141356g4lid5seerjdla8h6am9u997@4ax.com...
>
> Over the last three days, I've tried to access two separate youtube
> links on two separate occasions to find the W98 system freezes as the
> page is initially displayed. No keybd/mouse response. Required a
> hardware reboot to recover. I don't normally access youtube, but had
> done so in the previous week without problems.
>
> First link was:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZM779jJJFo
>
> The first time the problem occurred, I did a quick disk check - lost
> clusters found (and repaired).
>
> I retried the same link with number crunching background activity
> disabled - with the same result. Repeated disk check and then
> attempted to run defrag - incomplete after hitting a bad sector. This
> was repaired by running a complete disk check, including the surface
> test, after which the defrag would complete.
>
> Retried the link a third time with number crunching disabled - with
> the same result. Disk checked again without errors.
>
> The failed attempt to reach a differing Youtube link today (same
> system freeze), suggests that the problem wasn't going away by itself.
>
> The browser used is still the older Mozilla 1.7.11 - no changes here
> in over a year, and none expected in the future (without migrating to
> firefox or seamonkey).
>
> Trying for the same link using IE6 (rarely used but as up to date as
> MS permits) I got a blue screen that would not recover but that
> allowed a keybd ctrl/alt/del to reboot.
>
> Repeating this (if only to note down the OE exception number) produced
> normal performance.....?
>
> Repeating the attempt using default Mozilla then also produced normal
> performance.
>
> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
> (-8th year without reinstall)?
>
> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
>
> RL

legg
Mon Apr 28 10:33:00 PDT 2008

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:58:35 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>The "lost clusters" likely happened because a file was in the middle of
>being written when the crash occurred. Part of the file didn't get written,
>and the part that did get written became lost clusters. Lost clusters also
>frequently occur as a side-effect of cross-linked files (where head of file
>one gets attached to tail of file two, leaving behind the rest of the two
>files as lost clusters. They get fixed by deleting the info on the clusters
>and adjusting that part of the FAT involved to show that the clusters are
>available.
>
>There are a couple of problems with lost clusters: 1. Was the data that got
>lost (leaving lost clusters behind) and/or the data in the lost clusters
>themselves, important. When Scandisk fixes lost clusters, you have the
>choice of saving the data in CHK files. Unfortunately, when Scandisk runs
>automatically after a bad shutdown, Microsoft's stupid default setting was
>to delete the lost clusters without saving CHK files. This setting should be
>changed in SCANDISK.INI (at the very bottom of the file.) The action should
>be Save, not Delete.
>
>I cannot explain the behavior of YouTube except that perhaps problems with
>the Cache(s). Have you checked with YouTube Help to see if there isn't
>something known there?

Guess what kind of advice I'll get from youtube, the minute I mention
W98 or Mozilla...? Even inquiries from users with WXP tend to get
idiot responses.

I believe the lost clusters were from the number crunching app running
during the crash. These didn't occur when the background app was
suspended.

I'm using the Norton disk checking tools, though I did run MS scandisk
(without surface scan) prior to running the full disk checking with
surface scan, overnight, as a doublecheck on why the speed-disk defrag
could not handle the damaged sector.

Presently, MS scandisk does not run automatically after a crash on
this machine's OS, though occassionally there will be a forced
start-up into safe mode. I handle scanning manually, and usually in
safe mode, as well.

I view this current system much like a road-weary automobile or rusty
ocean-going hulk with various protrusions knocked off in practical use
and some considerable barnacle growth remaining here and there.

RL

Gary
Mon Apr 28 11:10:09 PDT 2008


"legg" <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in message
news:hm1c14tmo2sjo1hklhf1raftsqbdq5489c@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:58:35 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:
>
>>The "lost clusters" likely happened because a file was in the middle of
>>being written when the crash occurred. Part of the file didn't get
>>written,
>>and the part that did get written became lost clusters. Lost clusters also
>>frequently occur as a side-effect of cross-linked files (where head of
>>file
>>one gets attached to tail of file two, leaving behind the rest of the two
>>files as lost clusters. They get fixed by deleting the info on the
>>clusters
>>and adjusting that part of the FAT involved to show that the clusters are
>>available.
>>
>>There are a couple of problems with lost clusters: 1. Was the data that
>>got
>>lost (leaving lost clusters behind) and/or the data in the lost clusters
>>themselves, important. When Scandisk fixes lost clusters, you have the
>>choice of saving the data in CHK files. Unfortunately, when Scandisk runs
>>automatically after a bad shutdown, Microsoft's stupid default setting was
>>to delete the lost clusters without saving CHK files. This setting should
>>be
>>changed in SCANDISK.INI (at the very bottom of the file.) The action
>>should
>>be Save, not Delete.
>>
>>I cannot explain the behavior of YouTube except that perhaps problems with
>>the Cache(s). Have you checked with YouTube Help to see if there isn't
>>something known there?
>
> Guess what kind of advice I'll get from youtube, the minute I mention
> W98 or Mozilla...? Even inquiries from users with WXP tend to get
> idiot responses.

I was just thinking of "current site issues", FAQs, etc. Yeah, I can imagine
what kind of (non)assistance is available.

> I believe the lost clusters were from the number crunching app running
> during the crash. These didn't occur when the background app was
> suspended.

Could be. Could be Temporary Internet Files or other cache files in
mid-download... The movie itself, even.

> I'm using the Norton disk checking tools, though I did run MS scandisk
> (without surface scan) prior to running the full disk checking with
> surface scan, overnight, as a doublecheck on why the speed-disk defrag
> could not handle the damaged sector.

What damaged sector? Please do not call "lost clusters" "damaged sectors".
The former is a software issue, the latter is a hardware issue. Or do you
have test results that point to "damaged sectors"?

> Presently, MS scandisk does not run automatically after a crash on
> this machine's OS, though occassionally there will be a forced
> start-up into safe mode. I handle scanning manually, and usually in
> safe mode, as well.

Good!

> I view this current system much like a road-weary automobile or rusty
> ocean-going hulk with various protrusions knocked off in practical use
> and some considerable barnacle growth remaining here and there.

Sounds like fun, though I admit I'm a fan of fresh systems, <s>.

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

philo
Mon Apr 28 13:47:34 PDT 2008


"legg" <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in message
news:b2ob14hbjljjgfg56putfcvlgmkm713rda@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:34:30 -0500, "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
> >> (-8th year without reinstall)?
> >>
> >> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Are you using dial-up or DSL/cable ???
> >
> >First off. If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest you replace it.
> >
> >Secondly, I generally suggest a RAM test to rule out the possibility of
bad
> >H/W causing the problem.
> >
> >Since there are a number of small, light browsers out there, you may want
to
> >try a few and see if any of them are more reliable.
> >
> >If not, then there are deeper issues. (Which I suspect)
>
> It's DSL.

That's good...
I would have expected trouble with dial-up.


>
> What about the 'self-correcting' behavior exhibited by OS after
> running IE ? The fact that both browsers finally ran, after being
> dysfunctional at the specific task for a week?
>
> Is the flash utility used by both browsers being somehow straightened
> out by IE6, even though it also crashed first time around?
>

Good question. The fact that it's happing with two different browsers leads
me to think
that perhaps flash is not loading correctly at first...
but I don't know how the fix that.
I'd still try some other browser.

I often use K-Meleon with no problems...but your results may differ of
course


> This was the first time I'd ever seen a surface scan detect trouble on
> ANY machine's hard drive, not just this one. Previous defrag in March
> when it came out of back-up storage to receive and carry the current
> OS (cloned from previous current HDD). Only it's third 4-month tour of
> duty since purchase two years ago.
>
> Are there any known programs that can mimic the characteristics of a
> bad sector, possibly to avoid AV detection or other conventions?
>
> I recently (oct'07- Mar'08) spent a considerable amount of time and
> effort transfering to a new OS in a new machine using W2K on SATA HDD,
> only to see the new system's NTFS partition crash and burn during a
> 'repair' operation, in its first 3 months of actual use as primary.
>

Ok...I'd have expected lost clusters from a bad shut down...but not a bad
cluster.

If finding a bad cluster is a one time thing...I would not worry about it...
but I would check the drive periodically. If you are getting bad clusters
then I'd say you have a drive problem...
but if you get no more bad clusters I would not worry about it.

Gary
Mon Apr 28 15:12:27 PDT 2008

Lost clusters are a minor issue. On the other hand, if you find a BAD
cluster, one that can't be written to and/or read from, then it's time to
replace the HD... Now, not later after you lose a bunch more data.

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

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:O165hDXqIHA.1872@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> "legg" <legg@nospam.magma.ca> wrote in message
> news:b2ob14hbjljjgfg56putfcvlgmkm713rda@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 06:34:30 -0500, "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
>> >> (-8th year without reinstall)?
>> >>
>> >> Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >Are you using dial-up or DSL/cable ???
>> >
>> >First off. If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest you replace it.
>> >
>> >Secondly, I generally suggest a RAM test to rule out the possibility of
> bad
>> >H/W causing the problem.
>> >
>> >Since there are a number of small, light browsers out there, you may
>> >want
> to
>> >try a few and see if any of them are more reliable.
>> >
>> >If not, then there are deeper issues. (Which I suspect)
>>
>> It's DSL.
>
> That's good...
> I would have expected trouble with dial-up.
>
>
>>
>> What about the 'self-correcting' behavior exhibited by OS after
>> running IE ? The fact that both browsers finally ran, after being
>> dysfunctional at the specific task for a week?
>>
>> Is the flash utility used by both browsers being somehow straightened
>> out by IE6, even though it also crashed first time around?
>>
>
> Good question. The fact that it's happing with two different browsers
> leads
> me to think
> that perhaps flash is not loading correctly at first...
> but I don't know how the fix that.
> I'd still try some other browser.
>
> I often use K-Meleon with no problems...but your results may differ of
> course
>
>
>> This was the first time I'd ever seen a surface scan detect trouble on
>> ANY machine's hard drive, not just this one. Previous defrag in March
>> when it came out of back-up storage to receive and carry the current
>> OS (cloned from previous current HDD). Only it's third 4-month tour of
>> duty since purchase two years ago.
>>
>> Are there any known programs that can mimic the characteristics of a
>> bad sector, possibly to avoid AV detection or other conventions?
>>
>> I recently (oct'07- Mar'08) spent a considerable amount of time and
>> effort transfering to a new OS in a new machine using W2K on SATA HDD,
>> only to see the new system's NTFS partition crash and burn during a
>> 'repair' operation, in its first 3 months of actual use as primary.
>>
>
> Ok...I'd have expected lost clusters from a bad shut down...but not a bad
> cluster.
>
> If finding a bad cluster is a one time thing...I would not worry about
> it...
> but I would check the drive periodically. If you are getting bad clusters
> then I'd say you have a drive problem...
> but if you get no more bad clusters I would not worry about it.
>
>
>
>

PCR
Mon Apr 28 18:24:56 PDT 2008

legg wrote:
| Over the last three days, I've tried to access two separate youtube
| links on two separate occasions to find the W98 system freezes as the
| page is initially displayed. No keybd/mouse response. Required a
| hardware reboot to recover. I don't normally access youtube, but had
| done so in the previous week without problems.
|
| First link was:
|
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZM779jJJFo

(You made it SCARY to go, but...) that link worked for me using IE-- &
the first time! The screen came up real quick too! I am on dial-up,
though, & I must suffer through very choppy sound & video the first time
through-- it's incomprehensible! However, a 2nd playing is fine, which I
guess relies on TIFs (Temporary Internet Files). As you suspect, perhaps
an update of Flash is in order. As many have posted here (MEB was the
last)...

http://www.adobe.com/go/getflash
Adobe Flash Player version 9.0.124.0

That update goes quick & well. After it is done, at...

(a) C:\WINDOWS\Downloaded Program Files
(b) R-Clk "Shockwave Flash Object", Properties, Version tab,
should show v.9.0.124.0.

| The first time the problem occurred, I did a quick disk check - lost
| clusters found (and repaired).
|
| I retried the same link with number crunching background activity
| disabled - with the same result. Repeated disk check and then
| attempted to run defrag - incomplete after hitting a bad sector. This
| was repaired by running a complete disk check, including the surface
| test, after which the defrag would complete.
|
| Retried the link a third time with number crunching disabled - with
| the same result. Disk checked again without errors.
|
| The failed attempt to reach a differing Youtube link today (same
| system freeze), suggests that the problem wasn't going away by itself.
|
| The browser used is still the older Mozilla 1.7.11 - no changes here
| in over a year, and none expected in the future (without migrating to
| firefox or seamonkey).
|
| Trying for the same link using IE6 (rarely used but as up to date as
| MS permits) I got a blue screen that would not recover but that
| allowed a keybd ctrl/alt/del to reboot.
|
| Repeating this (if only to note down the OE exception number) produced
| normal performance.....?
|
| Repeating the attempt using default Mozilla then also produced normal
| performance.
|
| What could be responsible for this strange behavior in this W98 2ed OS
| (-8th year without reinstall)?
|
| Of course the youtube link was a waste of time, as usual.
|
| RL

--
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

porvoon
Tue Apr 29 01:16:44 PDT 2008

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> LOST CLUSTERS DO NOT MEAN A BAD HARD DRIVE!!!!!
>
> The rest of philo's post is worthless, but especially don't believe that
> lost clusters means a bad hard drive. PHILO IS A CLASS "A" IDIOT!!!
>
Again you have misread a post. Your extreme anger is clouding your judgment!

There is only one idiot I've seen on this news group...
and that is Mr. Terhune.

I am serious: You need help! You have a mental health issue that needs
to be addressed. The anger you express is not normal. You live in
isolation and that is not healthy.

Gary
Tue Apr 29 08:40:53 PDT 2008

What did I misread? He said "If your drive is loosing clusters, I suggest
you replace it." First, he can't spell. Second, he's totally WRONG. The
drive isn't "loosing clusters", the OP's disk tools found "lost clusters",
which are totally different. Should the OP take his advice, because he seems
to be such an *expert*, he's in for a whole lot of hurt for no reason.

He then "generally suggests a RAM test", which is totally ridiculous. You
test RAM when something suggests that RAM is a problem. That is clearly not
the case here.

Two totally different browsers failed the same way. After working perfectly
well in the immediate past. No way in hell ANOTHER browser is going to fix
the problem.

All in all, the only decent question Philo asked was Dial-up or DSL. The
rest was a bunch of worthless questions that even if answered would have led
to nowhere or, worse, to a radically wrong solution.

Look, the idiot has serious reading comprehension abilities, knows next to
nothing about Windows 98, and is a danger to innocents who access this group
for real answers to their problems. He should either shut up, watch and
learn, or he should go away forever.

And you are obviously still a moron.

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

"porvoon raganan" <porvoon@raganan.non> wrote in message
news:O1lSfFdqIHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> LOST CLUSTERS DO NOT MEAN A BAD HARD DRIVE!!!!!
>>
>> The rest of philo's post is worthless, but especially don't believe that
>> lost clusters means a bad hard drive. PHILO IS A CLASS "A" IDIOT!!!
>>
> Again you have misread a post. Your extreme anger is clouding your
> judgment!
>
> There is only one idiot I've seen on this news group...
> and that is Mr. Terhune.
>
> I am serious: You need help! You have a mental health issue that needs to
> be addressed. The anger you express is not normal. You live in isolation
> and that is not healthy.

Gary
Tue Apr 29 08:44:47 PDT 2008

Oh, and GFY. I've already admitted my health problems in this group to great
length, and yes there's lots of stress, but that DOESN'T mean that Philo
isn't an idiot or that you aren't a moron for defending him. (Hey, how about
you take off your mask. Ashamed of being such a shameless philaphilopod?)

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

"porvoon raganan" <porvoon@raganan.non> wrote in message
news:O1lSfFdqIHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> LOST CLUSTERS DO NOT MEAN A BAD HARD DRIVE!!!!!
>>
>> The rest of philo's post is worthless, but especially don't believe that
>> lost clusters means a bad hard drive. PHILO IS A CLASS "A" IDIOT!!!
>>
> Again you have misread a post. Your extreme anger is clouding your
> judgment!
>
> There is only one idiot I've seen on this news group...
> and that is Mr. Terhune.
>
> I am serious: You need help! You have a mental health issue that needs to
> be addressed. The anger you express is not normal. You live in isolation
> and that is not healthy.

Gary
Tue Apr 29 09:24:16 PDT 2008

PS -- Philo is also, principally, a whiner. I ONCE called him an idiot in
passing, and proceeded to painstakingly correct each item he'd screwed up,
and not impolitely, and he comes back with a "WHINE, you called me a bad
name. I'm going to go tell Microsoft on you!" As if Microsoft cares a whit.

I admit it, the pissant pisses me off. But when he so regularly gives people
wrong and DANGEROUS advice, I gotta call him out, and if I'm gonna do that,
I may as well enjoy it.

So, when you gonna take off your mask?

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


"porvoon raganan" <porvoon@raganan.non> wrote in message
news:O1lSfFdqIHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> LOST CLUSTERS DO NOT MEAN A BAD HARD DRIVE!!!!!
>>
>> The rest of philo's post is worthless, but especially don't believe that
>> lost clusters means a bad hard drive. PHILO IS A CLASS "A" IDIOT!!!
>>
> Again you have misread a post. Your extreme anger is clouding your
> judgment!
>
> There is only one idiot I've seen on this news group...
> and that is Mr. Terhune.
>
> I am serious: You need help! You have a mental health issue that needs to
> be addressed. The anger you express is not normal. You live in isolation
> and that is not healthy.

porvoon
Tue Apr 29 14:08:14 PDT 2008

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> Oh, and GFY. I've already admitted my health problems in this group to
> great length, and yes there's lots of stress, but that DOESN'T mean that
> Philo isn't an idiot or that you aren't a moron for defending him. (Hey,
> how about you take off your mask. Ashamed of being such a shameless
> philaphilopod?)
>

Mr. Terhune:

Good day to you sir. I believe the word you may have been looking for is
"philosophaster".

Rather than reply to each one of your excellent individual posts...
I choose to reply simply to this central one.

As I may have mentioned here...I am a professional group moderator...
but one who has no moderation authority on this group. I have been asked
to read over the messages here by a third party (which will go unnamed).
It was suggested that I review the posts and comment as necessary in an
attempt to smooth over the "bad vibes" which only would tend to
embarrass the host organization.

I have read the majority of the posts from the last month or so
and can now see why I was called upon to step in and have a look.

As you know...this is a discussion group for Windows98. With a quick
"Google search" a great majority of the questions asked here could be
answered with no need for this group at all. However...most of the folks
who post...come here in-fact for a discussion. (I would think that
should not surprise you.)

Unless some person who answers a question specifically passes themselves
off as an expert...all advice here is to be taken simply
as that...Viz: Advice.

You have mentioned this "Philo" person a number of times...and I have
read over his replies...and certainly must agree with you...he does
often reply without great insight...but I have found no intentional
deception nor advice that would do much more than perhaps waste a little
time. Some of the advice (possibly just by random chance) is correct...
but as far as I can see...the vast majority of it is simply humor.
(Or should I have said: quite *simple* humor ?)

What you seem to have not noticed ...is that by discussion...
a problem is eventually solved. Even wrong answers are generally part of
a learning process and will eventually be sorted out. The only thing I
can find this "Philo" character
guilty of is "talking" just a bit too much.

On the other hand, Mr. Terhune...you do pass yourself off as someone
with knowledge...A Microsoft Valuable Professional. You of all people
should conduct yourself in a professional manner. A true professional
should of course comment when he sees incorrect information being
posted...but you alone among all MVP's have stooped to name calling,
foul language and argumentative behavior.
None of that is suitable for a professional!

Also...You have asked me to take off my mask. I am not wearing one...
but if you expect me to post my actual email address here...then you
have a more serious problem than I thought!

In conclusion, I suspect that you are both a sensitive person
and a deep thinker...and I respect those qualities in you.
My suggestion is that both you and "Philo" pretend that neither one of
you have ever posted here before...and to start over with a clean slate.
As a totally isolated third party who can look at the situation with
perhaps only minimal bias...The funny thing about both you , Mr. Terhune
and "Philo" is how very similar to each other are. If I didn't know
better, I'd almost think you two were brothers who got into a fight
over something quite inconsequential.

I mean this: Best wishes to the both of you...
why not shake hands and move on? If you two fellows can resolve your
differences...then I see that there is still hope left in this world.

If you two cannot resolve your differences...then I see the entire world
following this terrible path.

I remain your obedient servant,

P. R.

Gary
Tue Apr 29 16:37:39 PDT 2008

Oh, so what you are is a totally pompous, self-important ass. Thank you for
explaining who you are. No, you hadn't done so previously.

Honestly, I started to answer your post inline and in a serious manner, but
you are really just too precious. You lack knowledge, you lack history. Go
away.

(One month... ROTFLMAO!!!)

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

"porvoon raganan" <porvoon@raganan.non> wrote in message
news:exDKm0jqIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> Oh, and GFY. I've already admitted my health problems in this group to
>> great length, and yes there's lots of stress, but that DOESN'T mean that
>> Philo isn't an idiot or that you aren't a moron for defending him. (Hey,
>> how about you take off your mask. Ashamed of being such a shameless
>> philaphilopod?)
>>
>
> Mr. Terhune:
>
> Good day to you sir. I believe the word you may have been looking for is
> "philosophaster".
>
> Rather than reply to each one of your excellent individual posts...
> I choose to reply simply to this central one.
>
> As I may have mentioned here...I am a professional group moderator... but
> one who has no moderation authority on this group. I have been asked to
> read over the messages here by a third party (which will go unnamed).
> It was suggested that I review the posts and comment as necessary in an
> attempt to smooth over the "bad vibes" which only would tend to embarrass
> the host organization.
>
> I have read the majority of the posts from the last month or so
> and can now see why I was called upon to step in and have a look.
>
> As you know...this is a discussion group for Windows98. With a quick
> "Google search" a great majority of the questions asked here could be
> answered with no need for this group at all. However...most of the folks
> who post...come here in-fact for a discussion. (I would think that should
> not surprise you.)
>
> Unless some person who answers a question specifically passes themselves
> off as an expert...all advice here is to be taken simply
> as that...Viz: Advice.
>
> You have mentioned this "Philo" person a number of times...and I have read
> over his replies...and certainly must agree with you...he does often reply
> without great insight...but I have found no intentional
> deception nor advice that would do much more than perhaps waste a little
> time. Some of the advice (possibly just by random chance) is correct...
> but as far as I can see...the vast majority of it is simply humor.
> (Or should I have said: quite *simple* humor ?)
>
> What you seem to have not noticed ...is that by discussion...
> a problem is eventually solved. Even wrong answers are generally part of a
> learning process and will eventually be sorted out. The only thing I can
> find this "Philo" character
> guilty of is "talking" just a bit too much.
>
> On the other hand, Mr. Terhune...you do pass yourself off as someone
> with knowledge...A Microsoft Valuable Professional. You of all people
> should conduct yourself in a professional manner. A true professional
> should of course comment when he sees incorrect information being
> posted...but you alone among all MVP's have stooped to name calling, foul
> language and argumentative behavior.
> None of that is suitable for a professional!
>
> Also...You have asked me to take off my mask. I am not wearing one...
> but if you expect me to post my actual email address here...then you have
> a more serious problem than I thought!
>
> In conclusion, I suspect that you are both a sensitive person
> and a deep thinker...and I respect those qualities in you.
> My suggestion is that both you and "Philo" pretend that neither one of you
> have ever posted here before...and to start over with a clean slate.
> As a totally isolated third party who can look at the situation with
> perhaps only minimal bias...The funny thing about both you , Mr. Terhune
> and "Philo" is how very similar to each other are. If I didn't know
> better, I'd almost think you two were brothers who got into a fight
> over something quite inconsequential.
>
> I mean this: Best wishes to the both of you...
> why not shake hands and move on? If you two fellows can resolve your
> differences...then I see that there is still hope left in this world.
>
> If you two cannot resolve your differences...then I see the entire world
> following this terrible path.
>
> I remain your obedient servant,
>
> P. R.
>