 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / General Topics / August 2007Icon Confusion
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 Why don't you try deleting the ShellconCache file (for the icons) in the windows folder, then power off the computer, and then turn it back on again in a few seconds to force a clean rebuilding of the icon cache. The assumption here being that either the cache has gotten a bit corrupted and/or has reached its limit in filesize and needs to be rebuilt. Either way, you have little to lose by trying it, as the ShellconCache file will be rebuilt. > This is Win98se > For some reason there is some icon confusion going on. For example, I [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Thanks > HN It's ShelliconCache Thats why I could not find it...... >Why don't you try deleting the ShellconCache file (for the icons) in the >windows folder, then power off the computer, and then turn it back on again [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> Thanks >> HN 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 [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > 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. 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. > On Aug 21, 3:19 pm, H...@invalid.com wrote: >> This is Win98se [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > 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 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 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). 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.  SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >> On Aug 21, 3:19 pm, H...@invalid.com wrote: >>> This is Win98se [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > 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). It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots. Just one cold reboot. > 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 [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >> 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). 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. 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.) 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. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com . > It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots. Just one > cold reboot. [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >>> 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). > 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 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >>> 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. >>> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >>>> 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). 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. 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't have to press any button to restart. 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. 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 SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >> Bull. A "warm" reboot is not a full Restart, if that's what you mean, but > a [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] >>>>> for >>>>> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL). > 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. > 2. Restart or Reboot, which does the same as above except you don't have to > press any button to restart. I don't think it does exactly the same thing. That is, rebooting the computer while it is on, vs turning it off and starting it up again, are NOT the same thing (unless I'm missing something). The second method of shutting the computer completely down and then turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left anywhere in any RAM memory location, whatsoever. No vestiges of any code or any data remain that way. > 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. OK. I'm probably remembering the warm vs cold reboot stuff from some really old computer. Or maybe I'm thinking of doing Ctrl-Alt-Del, vs hitting the hardware reset switch on this computer (there is some difference in those two reboots, the hardware reset one being a bit more thorough, and one that almost always works and rarely hangs up). > As for the ShellIconCache issue, you have Win98 in front of you (I don't). > Why don't you test? Won't hurt anything. Too lazy this time (did it not all that long ago anyways), and it takes a few moments to rebuild all the icons again. Besides which, he's probably already done it. :-) > 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 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>> ShellIconCache, >>> not until the next time you shut down (and you won't see it until you start >>> it again.) >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>> . >>>> It IS different, because it doesn't require TWO warm reboots. Just one >>>> cold reboot. >>>> >>>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>>>>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >>>>>> for >>>>>> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL). > I don't think it does exactly the same thing. That is, rebooting > the computer while it is on, vs turning it off and starting it up > again, are NOT the same thing (unless I'm missing something). The only difference is that the machine is off until you push the power button. _________________ > The second method of shutting the computer completely down and then > turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left anywhere > in any RAM memory location, whatsoever. No vestiges of any code > or any data remain that way. What possible difference would it make? SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ 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 >> I don't think it does exactly the same thing. That is, rebooting >> the computer while it is on, vs turning it off and starting it up [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > power button. > _________________ Not true. That's not the "only difference". >> The second method of shutting the computer completely down and then >> turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left anywhere >> in any RAM memory location, whatsoever. No vestiges of any code >> or any data remain that way. > > What possible difference would it make? It can, if there is some errant code running. > dadiOH > ____________________________ [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. > Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico >>> The second method of shutting the computer completely down and >>> then turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > It can, if there is some errant code running. When the computer boots the BIOS loads and passes control to the bootstrap loader; it in turn, loads an OS loader which then loads the rest of the OS and passes control to it. I guess all things are possible but I'm having trouble figuring out how said errant code would begin executing again. Some of the ways I can think of... 1. If the baddie were interrupt driven, the interrupts would have been reset during the boot so no execution. 2. It could modify the bootstrap loader (MBR). My anti-virus program would jump up and down in a conniption fit. 3. It could have modified the OS loader on the hard drive. In that case, it would make zero difference if the computer had been turned off or just rebooted. 4. It could set itself to run via one of the registry start up entries. Again, in that case, it would make zero difference if the computer had been turned off or just rebooted. 5. Others? All in all - even though I am 60 miles from either Florida coast - I think I'll worry more about a shark attack :) SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ 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 >>>> The second method of shutting the computer completely down and >>>> then turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > All in all - even though I am 60 miles from either Florida coast - I > think I'll worry more about a shark attack :) I think my original assertion was that rebooting is NOT identical to powering the computer off and restarting it again, because some code and data are still left in memory, which could be problematic in some instances. And I think Frank mentioned one of them (with the virus thing) as just one example. I'd like to see a reputable article detailing the facts on this subject, both with AT and ATX boards. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >>>>> The second method of shutting the computer completely down and >>>>> then turning it on again is more complete, as nothing is left [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > And I think Frank mentioned one of them (with the virus thing) as just one > example. >> I don't think it does exactly the same thing. That is, rebooting >> the computer while it is on, vs turning it off and starting it up [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >What possible difference would it make? I think a virus can hook into the Restart or Ctrl-Alt-Del functions. In my DOS days I was always advised to perform a cold boot (ie a hard reset) with a floppy diskette to get rid of any memory resident virus. A warm boot (Ctrl Alt Del) could not be guaranteed to be clean. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |>> I don't think it does exactly the same thing. That is, rebooting |>> the computer while it is on, vs turning it off and starting it up [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] | reset) with a floppy diskette to get rid of any memory resident virus. | A warm boot (Ctrl Alt Del) could not be guaranteed to be clean. DadiOH's anti-virus program would jump up and down in a conniption fit! And I hope avast! would do it too! | - Franc Zabkar | -- | Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. SignatureThanks 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 | 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! | As for the ShellIconCache issue, you have Win98 in front of you (I | don't). Why don't you test? Won't hurt anything. [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] |>>>>> shortcut for |>>>>> shutdown for years. (as for "rapidly", who knows. LOL). SignatureThanks 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 >> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): >> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 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. Again... Cite? Make it a good one. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): >>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Q.E.D. Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is completely cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely you jest! > Again... Cite? Make it a good one. > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >> >> Q.E.D. 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.) What about that case? According to your logic, even turning the computer off might not flush RAM. Why do you think it is something to take for granted that a reboot doesn't clear RAM, since it resets everything else? What use is the data contained therein? What reason would the designers have for maintaining that data through a reboot? 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? Yes I want a cite or three. I want to learn more about it. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is completely > cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely you jest! [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >>> >>> Q.E.D. I'm usually up a bit late - I'm kinda a nite owl. :-) > 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. > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>>> >>>> Q.E.D. > 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. And I still say that it doesn't make any difference if it is there or not. There is always *something* there anytime the machine is on. SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ 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 >> 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 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And I still say that it doesn't make any difference if it is there or > not. There is always *something* there anytime the machine is on. It sure can. Like in the case of a resident virus, for one example. Or some aberrant code which FORCES you to turn off the computer! (and that has happened on a few occasions over here) 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.) Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's no reason to keep the RAM alive. Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which means that even 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.) SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > I'm usually up a bit late - I'm kinda a nite owl. :-) > [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Q.E.D. > 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. > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> >>> 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.) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>> What about that >>> case? According to your logic, even turning the computer off might not flush >>> RAM. >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >>> 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? >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>> >>>> Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is completely >>>> cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely you jest! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >>>>>> left >>>>>> in memory that could be problematic (in some instances). So it is NOT >>>>>> "identical", per se, by definition. >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>>>> >>>>>> Q.E.D. 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. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >> I don't buy this "data remains in RAM" or "some of the data remains in > RAM" [quoted text clipped - 210 lines] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Q.E.D. 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. :-). > 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 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >>> Since the data in RAM isn't worth a damn after a restart, there's no reason >>> to keep the RAM alive. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>> 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! [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>> >>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>> 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, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>>> >>>> Only by turning the computer off will the entire RAM memory contents (with >>>> some parts still potentially containing some code or data) effectively >>>> destroyed. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>>> >>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>>>>> Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is >>>>>> completely cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely you jest! >>>>>>> Again... Cite? Make it a good one. >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >>>>>>>>> & >>>>>>>>> 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." [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Q.E.D. What makes the data random? The loss of a "table of contents"? How does removing power randomize the data if it doesn't change the bits? If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather than random? 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? SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > 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 [quoted text clipped - 256 lines] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. > 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. > 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). > 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. > -- > Gary S. Terhune [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> 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). >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>>> >>>> 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! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>>>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>>>>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>>>>> 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). [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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). [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. >> What makes the data random? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > written > into their cells yet. OK, memory cells are either 0 or 1. That their unpowered sate is random 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. >> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather than > random? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 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. >> Resetting (whether manually or programmatically) certainly appears to >> interrupt the power to the video card, the sound card, the hard drives... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 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. 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. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >>> Well, I've worked with electronics (and am an EE) all these years, as >>> you [quoted text clipped - 275 lines] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. >>> What makes the data random? >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> 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? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 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... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 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 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>> 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). >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>>> >>>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>>>>> 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.) [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>>>>> 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! [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >>>>>>> Either that or nothing happens to RAM when the >>>>>>> electricity is cut, it remains in the last-used state, which means that >>>>>>> even >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>>>>>> things >>>>>>> like Wake-On LAN. But only those parts that are necessary to keep alive >>>>>>> while >>>> the [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>>>>>> 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, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (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.) [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >>>>>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't require that you press Ctrl-Alt-Delete to restart Windows >>>>>>>>>>>>> 98. It >>>>>>>>>>>>> restarts Windows 98 with a warm boot." [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. 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. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >>>> What makes the data random? >>> [quoted text clipped - 399 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. > 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. SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ 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 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. > > 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 [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > ones I posted elsewhere in this thread). If there is a way, I'd sure > like to know how. >> 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 [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > 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 >> 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. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 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. SignaturedadiOH ____________________________ 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 > 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 [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>> 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. >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> >>>>> If it does change the bits, why not to all ones or all zeros, rather than >>>>> random? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>> >>> 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? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>> 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. >>> [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] >>>>>>>>> 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, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>>>>>>> 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! [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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! >>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>>>>>>>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 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). [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminology): There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 95 computer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since this does reach back to BIOS & post, I tend to agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is no different from a cold boot. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. 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. > > I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is > all [quoted text clipped - 283 lines] > >>>>>>>>> the things I have to do this weekend in preparation for a busy > trip OK, now after all that, I'm getting the picture, which is all I wanted, <g>. Thanks. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com >> I accept your description of what RAM does, but if resetting the CPU is > all [quoted text clipped - 467 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q.E.D. >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. That's not what "random" means in this context. It means that you can access any part of the memory at any time, just as easily as any other part. Pick any random byte in memory, you can read from it or write to it at any time. This is different from "sequential" storage like a tape, where you can't access a part of the tape until you do something about all the data ahead of it on the tape. Note that this also makes disks "random access memory", although the term "RAM" always refers to what we used to call "core memory": high-speed memory that the CPU accesses constantly, with nearly every instruction. SignatureTim Slattery MS MVP(DTS) Slattery_T@bls.gov http://members.cox.net/slatteryt >> 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). >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > high-speed memory that the CPU accesses constantly, with nearly every > instruction. But that was NOT the point was I was addresssing (no pun intended). But what I *was* talking about was the data contents of the RAM cells, and NOT the random access addressing part. Completely different. The addressing and data contents (of cells at any particular address) are completely different things. PS What are you doing up so late? Go get some rest, so I can too, <g>. SignatureGary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User www.grystmill.com > Cite? For what? The fact that the only way RAM memory is completely > cleared out is to turn off the computer? Surely you jest! [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >>> >>> Q.E.D. |>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): |>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] | 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. SignatureThanks 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 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. > |>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): > |>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > | Q.E.D. | 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. That's a tough book to lose, Dan! It comes up to my kneecaps! |> |>> Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): |> |>> There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] |> PCR |> pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks 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 || Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): || There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] | | 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. [quoted text clipped - 111 lines] | PCR | pcrrcp@netzero.net SignatureThanks 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 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> > || Just to clarify (and to correct my own mistakes in terminology): > || There are three ways to restart a Windows 98 or 95 computer. [quoted text clipped - 149 lines] > | PCR > | pcrrcp@netzero.net | 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. It's the same one. RAM & an HDD were added. An HDD, the monitor (twice), & the mouse were replaced. One keyboard key is recently cigarette burnt. But it's all still going just fine otherwise! | You really should just build | your machine next time, PCR. It takes more time but I so much prefer [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | my ethernet port was fried on my ASUS motherboard bu |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message