Intlharvester

Make sure that regular HTTP authenication is enabled (not just MS-proprietary NTLM) on the proxy server.

Turn off the auto reboot option in the System control panel so that you can see the blue screen stop information. It will usually tell you what driver is crashing, but if you can't figure out, try posting it here.

SHS: Just as a datapoint, I had Win2000 on my olde Pentium 133/112MB/SCSI-2 system and it was no slower than NT4-SP6 with ActiveDesktop. (The box is now repurposed as a linux mail server.) Other than a monsterous boottime (made worse by EISA detection and a slow memory count), the machine was perfectly usable for web/mail/MSOffice. So, unlike in the past, I don't think MS is that off in the specs, although it's true that you can sorta make up for a slow disk and minimal memory with a faster CPU.

By "disabling the SCSI BIOS", I meant disabling the boot device support in the BIOS (can't remember exactly what Adaptec calls this). This would also mean that the drives would be invisible under DOS unless you loaded the driver. After you do it, some BIOS stuff still happens, and you should still see the Ctrl-A prompt, but not the "D:\" detection. Older boards at least also had a way of completely disabling the BIOS via a jumper.

If your boot device is IDE, you might want to try disabling the SCSI BIOS (Ctrl+A at the Adaptec boot screen). Also by convention, you probably shouldn't have a non-boot device on ID0, although it should work. I've seen situations where there is some confusion between the IDE and SCSI BIOS detection order, and differences between warm and cold boots, and Windows 2000 maybe making an arbitrary decision based on what it thinks the boot device is. You also may want to use the disk mangler to explicity set the drive letters (to something like H: I: J: to avoid confusion with the CD-ROMs.)

Netscape 6 and 4.7x co-exist just fine. However, if you've had any preview or Mozilla releases installed, make sure to blow away your "User50" directory, and any moz*.dat files you can find. The browser works well enough, but I have to imagine that there will be a 6.01 within a month or two to fix some major annoyances. For example, even though NS is touting theme support, the browser hangs whenever you try to switch between themes. Doh! Other things, such as remembering the page position when you go Back have been fixed in the Mozilla tree.

I never got it to work under NT4 ... It's one of the two games I boot to DOS to play.

KJ1999 -- Easy CD Creator 3.5c with patches was listed as compatible with W2000 when it shipped in Feb. It only became 'incompatible' after WMP 7 shipped with all the new digital rights management stuff. After installing WMP7 and locking up, I did a 'last known good' to get rid of whatever they did the the EasyCD drivers and I'm currently burning with 3.5c just fine. (This wouldn't work if you could successfully boot after WMP7 was installed. Perhaps you have to deinstall WMP before installing EasyCD.) My theory: Microsoft wanted to break 3.5 because it doesn't support Digital Rights Mangement (copy protection for SDMI music), and Adaptec didn't really mind because it earns them upgrade dollars.

Down8 & DOSFreak -- By "multimedia", I was referring to the sound and video APIs, not the game APIs (which were way behind on NT4). With the possible exception of DirectShow, the multimedia APIs have always been better supported on NT than 9x, and lots of people use NT4 as a production platform on the creation side.

I'm not asking you questions, ****head, I'm flaming you because you are moron. L0L!!!indeed. 1) There's nothing in Whistler that will make it "run all your games" any more than Win2000 has. 90% of new games run on 2000 today -- in 1-2 years when Whister ships, there's no incentive for Microsoft to make 4 year old games start running. 2) NT has always had the exact same multimedia support as 9x. 3) DHTML was around in 1996, and that's when Microsoft shipped the DHTML-based "ActiveDesktop". They mess with the graphics a bit in the AD UI, and we're supposed to start spooging like you are? Microsoft has had XML/XSLT support on the desktop for more than a year. They are just starting to use it in the default UI. A skin deep change -- I don't see them dumping the registry for a something sane like a XML-based configuration system. 4) C# hasn't shipped yet. It will only be used for non-critical functionality in Whister. I could care less if they wrote this stuff in C# or J++ or VB. Microsoft has announced that Whister is not the target platform for the full .NET infrastructure, although it will have some bits and pieces. It's largely UI refresh, skin deep, that's all. The real .NET stuff comes in the next version. The fact that someone can get so pumped about some GUI tweaks is a pretty sad indictment of their understanding of how the current versions of Windows work. Myself, I'm more excited at the possiblity that 9x/ME will finally go away for good, and that IA64 will be supported.

Hey jdulmage -- What the hell do you mean that it has "9x support in it"? + Do you mean that it has a kludged-up partially 16-bit kernel? Of course not. + Do you mean that it runs Windows 9x drviers? Of course not. + Do you mean that it runs DOS drivers and Win3.1 .386 drivers (like Win9x does)? Of course not. + Do you mean that it runs programs with 9x-specific Win32 extentions? (It probably does not.) + Do you mean that it runs in an insecure single user mode? (Doesn't look like it from the screens.) + Is anything going to change about the Driver API or DirectX/OGL support that will make any better for gaming than Win2000? (Why would it?) + Is it magically going to make old DOS and 9x games that are incompatible with 2000 start working? (Microsoft wouldn't waste their time.) So, what the hell do you mean by "9x support"? Nothing, it seems -- you are flaming people with an absolutely meanless statement! It's great that MS is finally delivering an NT-based home user OS, and you are probably rightfully excited. Just remember that they could have done the same thing with NT 4.0 in 1996 (and didn't) or Win2000 this year (and didn't), and there's a real possiblity that they will fail to kill 9x one more time.

Well, this is going to sound like one of those walk 2 miles uphill to school stories, but what you are trying to should be possible. The 'optimal' solution on a non-PCMCIA laptop is a Xircom Parallel Network adapter. That plus the MS Network client (in the clients directory on any NTS CD) plus some tweaking should get the DOS machine talking to NT. If you only need to transfer a few files, it would probably be easier to get a Null Modem cable between the serial ports. Use any DOS Comm program and HyperTerminal and then use Kermit, XModem, YModem, or ZModem (best) to transfer the files.

It's impossible to set up an NT4-compatible Win2000 domain controller. If you want to play around with Win2000, use it as a member server only, and only upgrade your PDC when you are ready to move your domain to Active Directory.

First, if you have Cable or DSL, get two ethernet cards. Don't do local file sharing on the same interface as the Internet connection. Second, disable "Client for MS Networks" and "File/Print Sharing" on the Internet connected interface (Ethernet or dial-up). On the second, "internal" interface you can run filesharing. You can use a private IP address like 10.x.x.x, but I just use NetBEUI because it's faster and less of a hassle and won't 'leak' onto the Internet under any circumstances. Don't enable IP forwarding, either. If you are keeping your file sharing to a local, disconnected interface, you can enable the guest account without worry.

Computer Management -> System Tools -> Shared Folders. I think Computer Management is hidden by default on Professional. You can turn on Administrative Tools by right-clicking on the start menu. You can also run SRVMGR.EXE to get this info.