Atreyu

Hey, I know you are from Bloomington so I thought I'd ask you. I'm looking at apartments right now and I was wondering if you knew of any good ones. Mine sux and as soon as the lease expires in November, I want out. I'm looking for: 850-1200 square feet (850 for a one bedroom, or around 1200 for a two) Gas heat Washter and dryer included would be nice, but not necessary DSL capable -- More important to me than running water I work at SF, so I'd like to be close to there I'd like to stay in Bloomington, not move to Normal $600-$650 range (Lower than that is fine too if the quality is still good) Balcony or patio would be nice Also, I'd like one which is really clean and modern. NO brown puke nasty kitchen and bathroom tiles from the 70's etc. I've looked at nearly every place in that Apartment Blue Book magazine, and I've not been too impressed. So If you have any suggestions or recommendations, they would be welcomed!! Feel free to email me instead of posting. I only posted cuz it looks like you have your email button turned off. Thanks in advance!

I'm protected... but it's frustrating to look at my logs. Check them out for yourself: ***THERE USED TO BE A LINK HERE, BUT I HAVE TAKEN IT OUT BECAUSE OF THE HIGH VOLUME I EXPERIENCED*** (Sorry!) Just select how many you would like to have returned and click "Search". The app is far from pretty and far from 100% user friendly or perfect. It's just something I threw together to monitor my logs. It may be a tad slow too so just let it work. Anyways I'm getting kinda ticked about all these worms. Probably Osama behind the whole thing .

Basically, we need to turn the Middle East into a big hole.

Also you may want to check that you have denied your users to the ability to change permissions on the folders. If you have not done so, they can change permissions by relatively simple FTP commands rendering them inaccessible to you. Check your FTP's permissions on all files and folders to see if you still have the appropriate permissions, then go into the security setting for them, then go into "advanced", then disable "change security settings". If you have been denied access to these files, simply go in and change the permissions back to allow you access (may need to be an administrator to do this).

Yeah, winipcfg is a Win9x thing. Ipconfig is the NT version, and it is more kickbutt.

While installing adminpak.msi (from the Windows 2000 Server CD), I got an error message saying this is not compatible with Windows XP. Well, I need to use this package of admin tools... is there a work around? A new adminpak.msi? I went ahead and installed it, and most of them worked. The IIS snap in was the only one that gave me problems then. Any solution?

Welp, after my most recent attempt... Windows XP starts up, but before it's completely done booting, the computer just up-n restarts... all by itself out of the clear blue Oye.

You're a good man. I was hoping for an explanation like that, but never expected one. You have just moved up on my list. :-) Strange though, during my setup of liveware, it asks me for ksuser.dll and ks.sys (or something like this).. and i am forced to browse the "fixed" folder for these files. If i do not, setup hangs forever. NEways, i'll try do do exactly what you said tonight and I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks again

Hmm, perhaps I'll just have to try again. Were you prompted for certain files during the setup? (eg. some of the files you deleted before the setup like ksuser.dll?)

When trying to add either of my web servers to the IIS MMC Snap in, I am greeted with the lovely error: "Interface Not Registered" Why is this and how can I fix it? Thanx.

CRamaglia: i tried this fix... and i just can't get it to work. sounds like my setup is just like yours. what did you do? anything different that you encountered that the steps did not cover? or anybody else for that matter? i am using 2600.

If you are using ICS, then I think it is necessary.. or at least recommended.. to have two NICS in your server, as enabling ICS institutes the NAT routing service in your server. I never had much luck with ICS to tell you the truth. I much more prefer setting up NAT manually in the Routing and Remote Access utility from the Admin tools. That works REALLY well when done right. Not entirely sure if this is the reason for your problem since your NT workstation can still surf the net. You could try configuring DHCP on your server, and setting up the rest of your computers to obtain their TCP settings automagically from the server.. thus ensuring they have correct settings. If all else fails, save up $90 and buy yourself a personal router/firewall. They kick butt. Using a hub instead of a switch really wont do anything as far as sharing the internet. A switch builds a table within itself which shows every packet going into it exactly which port to blast out of, where as a hub simply blasts every packet out of every port, hoping that it will find the destined computer. So as you can see they perform the same function, in different ways. Switches are generally better for a consistently high network speed, as bandwidth is not hogged up by packets sent out of unessecary ports. Also, have you checked your DNS settings on your non-working machines? It would be possible to ping all the machines just fine, but not be able to get on the internet if you have not entered the DNS servers in the problem machines... or entered them incorrectly. This is why I would suggest using DHCP to troubleshoot the problem. Also make sure that on your problem machines you specify the correct IP address you are using for the internet gateway. If you are using two NICS in your server, then this IP address would be the address of the network card connected to your network, which in turn through NAT is connected to the internet. Hope this helps..

I have an ATA/100 drive on an ASUS CUSL2-C mobo and Windows 2k. How do I check what speed it's actually running at? Is it possible that my hard drive is not running at it's top speed because of a setting in Windows 2000?

I figured there were easy ways to turn that stuff off. Maybe I'll give it a try again soon. I'm just not one of those "early adopter" people. Plus, I only tried the beta version... anyways, enjoy!

I've done this before and it works fine... however I have two questions.. what exactly is this ASPI layer? what does it do? always wondered that even though i never really needed to know.

Had the same problem.. sorry, I have no solution.

I can't believe you would have the audacity to post something like that in this otherwise respectable forum. Also, to me it seems pretty dumb let the public know of your hacking intentions. I mean, ya might as well say, "Yeah, I'd like to rob somebody's house, but I'm not quite sure how to do it... anybody here have any suggestions?"

Windows 2000. On a machine like that, please don't put something like Windows 98 on it. That would be like putting lead tires on a mustang. **shivers**

My pc names are... W2KSVC1 - Client Machine W2KSVS1 - Server Machine W2KSVS2 - Server Machine W2KSVS3 - Server Machine W2KSVS4 - Server Machine

Amen brutha Don't go to IE 6. No real improvements, only annoyances.

I've installed the final version... and I have mixed feelings. It's gonna take some getting used to for me, but first things first.. turn off all the extra garbage, and tell all the Wizards that I'm no dummy... so they leave me alone. Gonna start really testing it tonight.

I used the last beta of IE6.. and I didn't like it. I reinstalled Windows so that I could go back to IE 5.5.. that's how much I disliked it. It has this annoying feature where pictures are resized automatically to fit your window.. so clicking on thumbnails for example would result in pictures that were not much bigger sometimes. You can turn this feature off, but it's one more step that is unnessecary. I also DON'T like that picture bar. I don't like having that thing pop up right on top of the picture when my mouse goes over it. Perhaps there is a way to turn that off too. I also encountered some stability and speed issues with the Beta 2.. but it COULD just be because it was Beta. As for me, I'll stick with 5.5 until I try **gulp** Windows XP Final (which will be tonight). Not looking forward to that, but I feel obliged to try it out. I just didnt have many good experiences with the Betas... Wanna talk about bloatware? Then let's talk about Windows XP :-)

Have not had this issue before.. but it's giving me a headache. I have just reinstalled windows and office on this machine cuz I got all new hardware. When I go to create a new profile for my Outlook mail, and I type in the correct user name of the mailbox, then click "check name", I am greeted with this beautiful error message.. "This action could not be completed. The name could not be matched to a name in the address list" I've done research, nothing has worked so far. Any ideas?

I will be getting two new hard drives tomorrow, one for each of my servers. I am running my own domain along with exchange, sql, antivirus, and other servers. Everything is configured very well and my whole setup here is working flawlessly. If I can avoid reinstalling and configuring everything I would like to. Basically, I want to know how I could go about mirroring, or imaging the existing drives, then writing the new hard drives with info. I can't seem to find any imaging software that works with NT server, so I'm about to scratch that idea.. But, here's another thought I had: put a new hard drive in one of the machines... then mirror the original disk. Take the original disk out as if it failed, and let the new drive take over. Will this work? If so, what's the process I need to go through to do it. If not, does anybody have an idea as to how I can go about installing a new drive, copying the old drive onto it such that I don't have to reinstall and reconfigure my setup. Thanx a ton!

Check this out... http://www.snapback.com I downloaded it and am gonna try it tomorrow. Looks kewl, and like it might work.