If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
btw, as Mike has noted before, Symantec didn't write, eg, Speed Disk. Peter
Norton was the originator and eventually got brought out. Until recently I had one of his versions (and a very early Symantec-labelled one!). Hard to believe I finally junked it all! I think I still have MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies (and DR-DOS 7.03 iirc), though I'm not sure why. Not only did I decide to get rid of LFN-unaware stuff for once and for all, I threw away Windows 95OS2! ....I feel like an OCD patient in remission... Shane "Shane" wrote in message ... Heh...just when I think I do know what you mean, Harry, it's gone again! vbg Shane "webster72n" wrote in message ... That's the ultimate in this NG, Shane, at least, I think so. Just like inspecting an object under the microscope. And the approach has to be universal, know what I mean? You sort of *made my day* and my name even is *Harry*. Thanks. *Same as above*. "Shane" wrote in message ... Yeah, no problem, Harry. You know, I do get a kind of perverse kick out of arguing *for* Symantec - if that's what it is. Though I don't suppose that's what it really is - or not any longer - as current offerings are so bloated (and the last versions 9x could use, so resource hungry) they're indefensible. I do differ with Mike, Noel and Figgeroo in this respect though, in that the circa 2000 versions were/are not *entirely* useless. Some of the DOS tools of NU2000 etc are pretty useful. Disk Edit for one, though it's not for novices and anyway DOS is almost obsolete now. But if you continue to run 98 or ME, the DOS version of Norton Disk Doctor is, on the whole, better than ScanDisk. The Windows version is, imo, unnecessary nonetheless, but the DOS one can often repair errors that the ScanDisk equivalent insists you boot to Windows to do, which is a pita if the error is actually preventing Windows from booting. These tools are very small and don't need installing to use (or buying a cd as I'd quite happily send you them if required, though I doubt you will require them). WinDoctor is simply unnecessary and the only good reason to run NU/NSW, imo, is for SpeedDisk - which is (was) available as a standalone anyway, and although seemingly more expensive that way at least does not come with a whole host of other programs to tempt the user to screw up their system. Maybe Mike, Noel and Figgington-Smythe's approach is actually the correct one, but since *I* still use the suite, I'm unable to condemn all components outright. Anyway, you should take a look at Custom installation options. For instance, you could install *only* SpeedDisk (more-or-less). Same goes for most installations - choose Custom. If the options get confusing you can always go back and change to Standard. Shane webster72n wrote: Mighty interesting, Shane and showing, you know your *stuff*. You read what Mike said and I don't want to get on his bad side. Just kidding, since I am not much more than a novice, I better follow his advice to aim for the local dumpster. Thanks Shane and Mike. Harry. "webster72n" wrote in message ... Aren't you a little hard on this "innocent" CD, Mike, to destine it for the "local dumpster"? What if I found a buyer, if the price was right? I hate to loose "the thing", it "seemed" to do a good job. Harry. "Mike M" wrote in message ... Using this program the way I do hopefully doesn't make me your enemy. Just as long as you realise the program concerned is useless and does nothing to help keep your system running but rather the reverse as demonstrated by this thread. Personally I don't know why you bother and would suggest the best place for the CD concerned is the local dumpster. :-) -- Mike Maltby webster72n wrote: Yes Mike, I am sure to have been able to do without it (along the way my pc told me it had to do with NetFramework), but I didn't want to have this showing up every time I do a scan (at least once a month or so). Therefore I took care of it. Using this program the way I do hopefully doesn't make me your enemy. Extending my hand with peace greetings g. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
Hi Shane,
I was also a Peter Norton and PCTools fan back in the 80s and early 90s. Talking of vintage I find I still have copies of DOS 4.01, 5 and 6 as well as 6.22 and am sure if I looked hard would also find 3.2. WFW3.1 and WFW3.11 as well as Win2, Win3, 3.1 and 3.11 but no Windows 1. Also a copy of MS Office 4.3. I really really really need to clear up some of my archives. :-) -- Mike Maltby Shane wrote: btw, as Mike has noted before, Symantec didn't write, eg, Speed Disk. Peter Norton was the originator and eventually got brought out. Until recently I had one of his versions (and a very early Symantec-labelled one!). Hard to believe I finally junked it all! I think I still have MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies (and DR-DOS 7.03 iirc), though I'm not sure why. Not only did I decide to get rid of LFN-unaware stuff for once and for all, I threw away Windows 95OS2! ...I feel like an OCD patient in remission... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
I *know* you have Win2.x - for very good reason!
I also have a copy of Win3.1(something or other) here - not to mention DOS 6.something... and even a copy (if I can find it) of Qbasic from who knows when? which still runs happily on XP, running a little program I created for fun on a Dragon 64..... I could probably lay my hands on the single floppy that the CP/M for that PC came on, if I *really* searched! -- Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows) Nil Carborundum Illegitemi http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm http://tinyurl.com/6oztj Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's "Mike M" wrote in message ... Hi Shane, I was also a Peter Norton and PCTools fan back in the 80s and early 90s. Talking of vintage I find I still have copies of DOS 4.01, 5 and 6 as well as 6.22 and am sure if I looked hard would also find 3.2. WFW3.1 and WFW3.11 as well as Win2, Win3, 3.1 and 3.11 but no Windows 1. Also a copy of MS Office 4.3. I really really really need to clear up some of my archives. :-) -- Mike Maltby Shane wrote: btw, as Mike has noted before, Symantec didn't write, eg, Speed Disk. Peter Norton was the originator and eventually got brought out. Until recently I had one of his versions (and a very early Symantec-labelled one!). Hard to believe I finally junked it all! I think I still have MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies (and DR-DOS 7.03 iirc), though I'm not sure why. Not only did I decide to get rid of LFN-unaware stuff for once and for all, I threw away Windows 95OS2! ...I feel like an OCD patient in remission... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
And here I thought to be the only one having a problem with that, Shane lol Harry. "Shane" wrote in message ... Heh...just when I think I do know what you mean, Harry, it's gone again! vbg Shane "webster72n" wrote in message ... That's the ultimate in this NG, Shane, at least, I think so. Just like inspecting an object under the microscope. And the approach has to be universal, know what I mean? You sort of *made my day* and my name even is *Harry*. Thanks. *Same as above*. "Shane" wrote in message ... Yeah, no problem, Harry. You know, I do get a kind of perverse kick out of arguing *for* Symantec - if that's what it is. Though I don't suppose that's what it really is - or not any longer - as current offerings are so bloated (and the last versions 9x could use, so resource hungry) they're indefensible. I do differ with Mike, Noel and Figgeroo in this respect though, in that the circa 2000 versions were/are not *entirely* useless. Some of the DOS tools of NU2000 etc are pretty useful. Disk Edit for one, though it's not for novices and anyway DOS is almost obsolete now. But if you continue to run 98 or ME, the DOS version of Norton Disk Doctor is, on the whole, better than ScanDisk. The Windows version is, imo, unnecessary nonetheless, but the DOS one can often repair errors that the ScanDisk equivalent insists you boot to Windows to do, which is a pita if the error is actually preventing Windows from booting. These tools are very small and don't need installing to use (or buying a cd as I'd quite happily send you them if required, though I doubt you will require them). WinDoctor is simply unnecessary and the only good reason to run NU/NSW, imo, is for SpeedDisk - which is (was) available as a standalone anyway, and although seemingly more expensive that way at least does not come with a whole host of other programs to tempt the user to screw up their system. Maybe Mike, Noel and Figgington-Smythe's approach is actually the correct one, but since *I* still use the suite, I'm unable to condemn all components outright. Anyway, you should take a look at Custom installation options. For instance, you could install *only* SpeedDisk (more-or-less). Same goes for most installations - choose Custom. If the options get confusing you can always go back and change to Standard. Shane webster72n wrote: Mighty interesting, Shane and showing, you know your *stuff*. You read what Mike said and I don't want to get on his bad side. Just kidding, since I am not much more than a novice, I better follow his advice to aim for the local dumpster. Thanks Shane and Mike. Harry. "webster72n" wrote in message ... Aren't you a little hard on this "innocent" CD, Mike, to destine it for the "local dumpster"? What if I found a buyer, if the price was right? I hate to loose "the thing", it "seemed" to do a good job. Harry. "Mike M" wrote in message ... Using this program the way I do hopefully doesn't make me your enemy. Just as long as you realise the program concerned is useless and does nothing to help keep your system running but rather the reverse as demonstrated by this thread. Personally I don't know why you bother and would suggest the best place for the CD concerned is the local dumpster. :-) -- Mike Maltby webster72n wrote: Yes Mike, I am sure to have been able to do without it (along the way my pc told me it had to do with NetFramework), but I didn't want to have this showing up every time I do a scan (at least once a month or so). Therefore I took care of it. Using this program the way I do hopefully doesn't make me your enemy. Extending my hand with peace greetings g. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
Mike,
I took a look through the one box of (20) floppies I still retain, last night. Apparently I kept DOS 5.00 as well. I kept ERDs for Win95 original and OS2. Suggestions as to 'Why?' on a postcard please! I still have a copy of WFW 3.11 on the hd here. Everything was on hd, duplicated on cd. It's the stacks of redundant cds that were the problem. I had a kind of fun getting everything to install from cd, or be copied to flat folders on the hd and install from there, just seeing how much quicker I could make it all go. I made a cd that would install DR-DOS 7.03, then MS-DOS 6.22, then WFW 3.11 - just had to start it from a DR-DOS boot disk and it autoran from there, then installed the best of the utilities. I guess it was the fun of automating, and as such a bit like building a train set then switching it on and just sitting there! I think it's my Scottish blood makes me rue having got rid of it all - and the English that makes me feel that no matter how much work I put in, it was *still* a good idea to ditch it! That cd was the genesis of my ultimate multi-boot volume - you could get Windows 2.x on too and put the whole lot beneath Win 95 and on top of *that*, NT 4.0! Finally I squeezed 98se in, out of curiosity at what point it just wouldn't work anymore (which point I didn't reach). And all 7 OSes went into one 2G volume. I think I had to write a boot up script to select between 95 or 98, but otherwise it was straight forward enough apart from the Boot sequences! But my video wouldn't work, ie I couldn't get more than 16 colours in WFW, and I couldn't go online with any of my last four modems, even in NT 4.0 and, as educational as it was that's all it was. The ironic thing is, before long hardware won't be 9x compatable either! Shane "Mike M" wrote in message ... Hi Shane, I was also a Peter Norton and PCTools fan back in the 80s and early 90s. Talking of vintage I find I still have copies of DOS 4.01, 5 and 6 as well as 6.22 and am sure if I looked hard would also find 3.2. WFW3.1 and WFW3.11 as well as Win2, Win3, 3.1 and 3.11 but no Windows 1. Also a copy of MS Office 4.3. I really really really need to clear up some of my archives. :-) -- Mike Maltby Shane wrote: btw, as Mike has noted before, Symantec didn't write, eg, Speed Disk. Peter Norton was the originator and eventually got brought out. Until recently I had one of his versions (and a very early Symantec-labelled one!). Hard to believe I finally junked it all! I think I still have MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies (and DR-DOS 7.03 iirc), though I'm not sure why. Not only did I decide to get rid of LFN-unaware stuff for once and for all, I threw away Windows 95OS2! ...I feel like an OCD patient in remission... |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
Ah yes! The Reversi championships! vbg
Shane "Noel Paton" wrote in message ... I *know* you have Win2.x - for very good reason! I also have a copy of Win3.1(something or other) here - not to mention DOS 6.something... and even a copy (if I can find it) of Qbasic from who knows when? which still runs happily on XP, running a little program I created for fun on a Dragon 64..... I could probably lay my hands on the single floppy that the CP/M for that PC came on, if I *really* searched! -- Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows) Nil Carborundum Illegitemi http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm http://tinyurl.com/6oztj Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's "Mike M" wrote in message ... Hi Shane, I was also a Peter Norton and PCTools fan back in the 80s and early 90s. Talking of vintage I find I still have copies of DOS 4.01, 5 and 6 as well as 6.22 and am sure if I looked hard would also find 3.2. WFW3.1 and WFW3.11 as well as Win2, Win3, 3.1 and 3.11 but no Windows 1. Also a copy of MS Office 4.3. I really really really need to clear up some of my archives. :-) -- Mike Maltby Shane wrote: btw, as Mike has noted before, Symantec didn't write, eg, Speed Disk. Peter Norton was the originator and eventually got brought out. Until recently I had one of his versions (and a very early Symantec-labelled one!). Hard to believe I finally junked it all! I think I still have MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies (and DR-DOS 7.03 iirc), though I'm not sure why. Not only did I decide to get rid of LFN-unaware stuff for once and for all, I threw away Windows 95OS2! ...I feel like an OCD patient in remission... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
mscoree.dll
This is all fascinating stuff, I noticed this morning when I went to pull
down my ngs they have put a whole load of Vista groups on now. Joan Mike M wrote: The ironic thing is, before long hardware won't be 9x compatable either! It's already there Shane, I guess I could have an amusing afternoon seeing if I could get Win Me up and running on my newest box, an AMD64 dual core with 2GB of RAM and nForce 4 chipset. My OSs are on a RAID0 set and archival storage is on a RAID5 set (Silicon Image chip), all with SATA drives and I very much doubt Win Me would touch any of it. However it also has an 80GB PATA drive (which is currently used for Vista due to Vista barfing at my nForce RAID0, let alone installing on it) so Win Me may just go. The question though is, is it worth the time and effort? vbg. Oh, since the 2GB of RAM is 2x1GB I can't even pull sticks to get below 512MB, all the more so since it is dual channel and needs two sticks to function. I took a look through the one box of (20) floppies I still retain, last night. Apparently I kept DOS 5.00 as well. I kept ERDs for Win95 original and OS2. Suggestions as to 'Why?' on a postcard please! I still have a copy of WFW 3.11 on the hd here. Everything was on hd, duplicated on cd. It's the stacks of redundant cds that were the problem. I had a kind of fun getting everything to install from cd, or be copied to flat folders on the hd and install from there, just seeing how much quicker I could make it all go. I made a cd that would install DR-DOS 7.03, then MS-DOS 6.22, then WFW 3.11 - just had to start it from a DR-DOS boot disk and it autoran from there, then installed the best of the utilities. I guess it was the fun of automating, and as such a bit like building a train set then switching it on and just sitting there! I think it's my Scottish blood makes me rue having got rid of it all - and the English that makes me feel that no matter how much work I put in, it was *still* a good idea to ditch it! That cd was the genesis of my ultimate multi-boot volume - you could get Windows 2.x on too and put the whole lot beneath Win 95 and on top of *that*, NT 4.0! Finally I squeezed 98se in, out of curiosity at what point it just wouldn't work anymore (which point I didn't reach). And all 7 OSes went into one 2G volume. I think I had to write a boot up script to select between 95 or 98, but otherwise it was straight forward enough apart from the Boot sequences! But my video wouldn't work, ie I couldn't get more than 16 colours in WFW, and I couldn't go online with any of my last four modems, even in NT 4.0 and, as educational as it was that's all it was. The ironic thing is, before long hardware won't be 9x compatable either! |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is "mscoree.dll." | Marty | General | 3 | October 5th 04 02:35 AM |
Missing file: mscoree.dll | Harry Jacobson | General | 6 | September 20th 04 10:31 PM |
MSCOREE.DLL can not be found | Tina | Software & Applications | 4 | August 5th 04 11:12 PM |
MSCOREE.DLL | THAGEN | Software & Applications | 1 | June 26th 04 06:04 PM |
mscoree.dll missing | Tom Barkas | Software & Applications | 4 | June 18th 04 12:46 AM |