Computer stops right at boot

"jbrandonbb gmail.com" <johnmbrandon gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 12, 11:37 pm, John Doe <j... usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Google Groups is the spam portal to USENET, and it's used by most
>> trolls and especially by nym shifting trolls. Besides all of the
>> spam and trolling, the fact that it's so easy for you and others
>> to post through Google Groups unfortunately means those with
>> little or no technical skill are attracted to USENET groups. Some
>> users used to complain about that, those users should be pulling
>> their hair out by now thanks to Google Groups.
>
> I assume you have vast scientific research on the claims about who
> uses Google Groups?

I view every post's header information. I keep a record of spammer
posts including header information. Does the Google Groups news
server even have an option for Google users to see header
information when reading a new post? Google Groups is in fact where
at least 90% of the spam flowing in to USENET comes from these days.
Same for trolls, but that's less scientific and more of a judgment
call.











>
>
>
>
> Path: newsdbm02.news.prodigy.net!newsdst02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> From: "jbrandonbb gmail.com" <johnmbrandon gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
> Subject: Re: Computer stops right at boot
> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:22:34 -0800 (PST)
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 23
> Message-ID: <a919e98a-d702-4c28-9b2e-77e4330ae457 m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
> References: <d5c6c963-b320-44be-b7bd-20c9113a793b v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <47880cd1$0$47122$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <69e40e15-2b13-4da4-aa15-246f9b48ba22 k39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <gl5ij.39003$Pv2.551 newssvr23.news.prodigy.net> <822affe6-ffb4-4c83-ae73-2bed83ffc6a0 c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> <ushij.13998$6%.4681 nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.128.229.137
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1200262954 16913 127.0.0.1 (13 Jan 2008 22:22:34 GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:22:34 +0000 (UTC)
> Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
> Injection-Info: m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.128.229.137; posting-account=PeFORgoAAADORIdcTHt1Hn5_33n9132t
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
> Bytes: 2372
> Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:501189
> X-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:22:36 EST (newsdbm02.news.prodigy.net)
>
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

John Doe wrote:
> "jbrandonbb gmail.com" <johnmbrandon gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 12, 11:37 pm, John Doe <j... usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Google Groups is the spam portal to USENET, and it's used by most
>>> trolls and especially by nym shifting trolls. Besides all of the
>>> spam and trolling, the fact that it's so easy for you and others
>>> to post through Google Groups unfortunately means those with
>>> little or no technical skill are attracted to USENET groups. Some
>>> users used to complain about that, those users should be pulling
>>> their hair out by now thanks to Google Groups.
>> I assume you have vast scientific research on the claims about who
>> uses Google Groups?
>
> I view every post's header information. I keep a record of spammer
> posts including header information. Does the Google Groups news
> server even have an option for Google users to see header
> information when reading a new post? Google Groups is in fact where
> at least 90% of the spam flowing in to USENET comes from these days.
> Same for trolls, but that's less scientific and more of a judgment
> call.

>>

Very true. And the rest come from AOL and WebTV

Bob
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

> Note that on some motherboards, the BIOS release stream changes
> to a new tool flow, part way through. Thus, some people discover
> they can no longer "flash backwards". I don't know of a
> guaranteed recipe to always fix that (other than replace
> chip with a PLCC from badflash.com , for boards with a
> PLCC flash chip).

Okay, the latest BIOS did the trick, thank you. Now I have a new
issue. When I install Vista, I get the error 0x80070017, windows
cannot install required files. I have a SATA drive (a Seagate
Barracuda 7200), PK5 motherboard, 2GB of RAM, etc. I have actually
tried two different hard disks, tried replacing SATA cables, moving
them to a different spot, etc.. The BIOS sees the drive just fine, my
Vista disk is clean. It is almost like the computer is having trouble
copying files. It gives me the error at the same time each time --
when extracting files. I tried formatting through Vista (I don't have
a floppy drive), etc. Any ideas?
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

> A problem copying files, could be bad media, bad drive, flaky
> I/O with motherboard, or bad RAM corrupting the decompression.
> (Assuming Vista checks the checksum of the stuff it has
> expanded etc.)
>
> Paul

Ubuntu installed fine, no problems. I am starting to suspect
motherboard. It just seems like it is giving me grief. I have tried
installing with a different DVD drive, different HDD, etc. Next I will
try with two fewer RAM chips and see if that helps. It's confusing
when Linux installs fine but Windows won't, as though Windows is
trying to do something and is bumping into the same problem. Of
course, I have no overwritten the Linux install in trying to install
Windows again so I will have to re-install again to test out the
testing software you mentioned...

That error does come up in the search, but no one seems to have a
startling remedy...

- JB
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

On Jan 14, 8:35 pm, DevilsPGD <spam_narf_s... RemoveThis @crazyhat.net> wrote:
> In message <fmh055$c2...@aioe.org> Paul <nos... RemoveThis @needed.com> wrote:
>
> >Well, you have 2GB or RAM, so it isn't the "4GB" problem.
>
> I haven't read the entire thread, but that isn't entirely certain. If
> you have two 1GB video cards (and there do appear to be a couple of
> these on the market), for example, you'll have less then 2GB of
> available addressable space left for real RAM.
>
> Okay, unlikely, but it's worth mentioning the possibility.

What is the 4GB problem?
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

jbrandonbb DeleteThis @gmail.com wrote:
>> Note that on some motherboards, the BIOS release stream changes
>> to a new tool flow, part way through. Thus, some people discover
>> they can no longer "flash backwards". I don't know of a
>> guaranteed recipe to always fix that (other than replace
>> chip with a PLCC from badflash.com , for boards with a
>> PLCC flash chip).
>
> Okay, the latest BIOS did the trick, thank you. Now I have a new
> issue. When I install Vista, I get the error 0x80070017, windows
> cannot install required files. I have a SATA drive (a Seagate
> Barracuda 7200), PK5 motherboard, 2GB of RAM, etc. I have actually
> tried two different hard disks, tried replacing SATA cables, moving
> them to a different spot, etc.. The BIOS sees the drive just fine, my
> Vista disk is clean. It is almost like the computer is having trouble
> copying files. It gives me the error at the same time each time --
> when extracting files. I tried formatting through Vista (I don't have
> a floppy drive), etc. Any ideas?
>

Well, you have 2GB or RAM, so it isn't the "4GB" problem.

In my search engine, I find plenty of hits for "0x80070017", so
you can try some of their suggestions.

If it was my computer, I'd also want to run separate tests. I like
memtest86+ from a floppy or CD. A couple passes is enough (no more
than an hour or two). It should be error free. Booting an alternate
OS and running Prime95 is also a possible test. I might try Ubuntu
for that, as they do releases quite frequently, and maybe they have
support for your board. You don't need to install any software for
that, and just boot Ubuntu right from the CD. Prime95 is available
for Windows or Linux, on the mersenne.org web site. You'd download
the Linux version, and run it from a terminal window.

A problem copying files, could be bad media, bad drive, flaky
I/O with motherboard, or bad RAM corrupting the decompression.
(Assuming Vista checks the checksum of the stuff it has
expanded etc.)

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

In message <fmh055$c2m$1@aioe.org> Paul <nospam.RemoveThis@needed.com> wrote:

>Well, you have 2GB or RAM, so it isn't the "4GB" problem.

I haven't read the entire thread, but that isn't entirely certain. If
you have two 1GB video cards (and there do appear to be a couple of
these on the market), for example, you'll have less then 2GB of
available addressable space left for real RAM.

Okay, unlikely, but it's worth mentioning the possibility.
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

On Jan 14, 9:34 pm, Paul <nos....RemoveThis@needed.com> wrote:
> jbrando....RemoveThis@gmail.com wrote:
> >> A problem copying files, could be bad media, bad drive, flaky
> >> I/O with motherboard, or bad RAM corrupting the decompression.
> >> (Assuming Vista checks the checksum of the stuff it has
> >> expanded etc.)
>
> >> Paul
>
> > Ubuntu installed fine, no problems. I am starting to suspect
> > motherboard. It just seems like it is giving me grief. I have tried
> > installing with a different DVD drive, different HDD, etc. Next I will
> > try with two fewer RAM chips and see if that helps. It's confusing
> > when Linux installs fine but Windows won't, as though Windows is
> > trying to do something and is bumping into the same problem. Of
> > course, I have no overwritten the Linux install in trying to install
> > Windows again so I will have to re-install again to test out the
> > testing software you mentioned...
>
> > That error does come up in the search, but no one seems to have a
> > startling remedy...
>
> > - JB
>
> If you can install Linux, then give Prime95 (mersenne.org) a try. The
> purpose of running the torture test, is to detect processor or RAM problems.
> If you use separate directories to hold the executable, you can even
> run multiple copies (being careful to set the max RAM on each one
> to a reasonable value).
>
> Vista has a problem installing on a 4GB system. One solution
> is removing some RAM, doing the install, and then putting the
> RAM back.
>
> While running Linux, can you read the entire contents of the Vista
> media, without a problem ?
>
> Paul

One other thing on this nightmare install -- when I try to load XP
(with the idea that I could upgrade to Vista later) it says "error
loading operating system" after the first reboot which tells me the
optical media is fine: why would two different discs produce similar
errors? I have also used two diff DVD drives, two diff HDDs. The only
commonality is this BLANK BLANK motherboard.
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

jbrandonbb.DeleteThis@gmail.com wrote:
>> A problem copying files, could be bad media, bad drive, flaky
>> I/O with motherboard, or bad RAM corrupting the decompression.
>> (Assuming Vista checks the checksum of the stuff it has
>> expanded etc.)
>>
>> Paul
>
> Ubuntu installed fine, no problems. I am starting to suspect
> motherboard. It just seems like it is giving me grief. I have tried
> installing with a different DVD drive, different HDD, etc. Next I will
> try with two fewer RAM chips and see if that helps. It's confusing
> when Linux installs fine but Windows won't, as though Windows is
> trying to do something and is bumping into the same problem. Of
> course, I have no overwritten the Linux install in trying to install
> Windows again so I will have to re-install again to test out the
> testing software you mentioned...
>
> That error does come up in the search, but no one seems to have a
> startling remedy...
>
> - JB
>

If you can install Linux, then give Prime95 (mersenne.org) a try. The
purpose of running the torture test, is to detect processor or RAM problems.
If you use separate directories to hold the executable, you can even
run multiple copies (being careful to set the max RAM on each one
to a reasonable value).

Vista has a problem installing on a 4GB system. One solution
is removing some RAM, doing the install, and then putting the
RAM back.

While running Linux, can you read the entire contents of the Vista
media, without a problem ?

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

jbrandonbb DeleteThis @gmail.com wrote:

>
> One other thing on this nightmare install -- when I try to load XP
> (with the idea that I could upgrade to Vista later) it says "error
> loading operating system" after the first reboot which tells me the
> optical media is fine: why would two different discs produce similar
> errors? I have also used two diff DVD drives, two diff HDDs. The only
> commonality is this BLANK BLANK motherboard.

I suppose anything is possible. But the thing is, by using multiple
OSes, you should be able to see whether the hardware is at fault
or not.

It sounds like the driver you've provided, is not loading in Windows for
some reason. Drivers load according to enumeration. Perhaps you
could verify the enumeration while in Linux ? (Linux has lspci,
lsusb and dmesg, to report things about hardware.)

For example, the IDE interfaces on my current motherboard
are 0x8086 0x24DB. The first number, is the number for Intel.
The second number, I can verify by looking in the Intel
datasheet for the ICH5/ICH5R Southbridge. You should be
able to do something similar for your ICH9R Southbridge.

OK, a thought just came to mind. There are two SATA controllers,
one controls four ports, the other two. Are your RAID disks
connected to the bootable SATA controller ? Look for the
following lines in your user manual -

SATA1/2/5/6 Red Master Boot Disk
SATA3/4 Black Slave Data Disk

Some of the device enumerations can be seen here on PDF page 9.
You may be able to see some of those numbers by using "lspci"
in Linux.

http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/specupdt/31697304.pdf

Maybe it would be enough to just change SATA ports on the
motherboard ?

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

In message
<f078ea39-750a-4625-af1a-8472e0f03238 DeleteThis @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
"jbrandonbb@gmail.com" <johnmbrandon DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 14, 8:35 pm, DevilsPGD <spam_narf_s... DeleteThis @crazyhat.net> wrote:
>> In message <fmh055$c2...@aioe.org> Paul <nos... DeleteThis @needed.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Well, you have 2GB or RAM, so it isn't the "4GB" problem.
>>
>> I haven't read the entire thread, but that isn't entirely certain. If
>> you have two 1GB video cards (and there do appear to be a couple of
>> these on the market), for example, you'll have less then 2GB of
>> available addressable space left for real RAM.
>>
>> Okay, unlikely, but it's worth mentioning the possibility.
>
>What is the 4GB problem?

Short version, 32-bit CPUs can only address up to 4GB of memory.

(There are a few exceptions that only apply to specific hardware)

The "4GB problem" is that some hardware requires address space of it's
own. For example, to write data into video memory, your CPU will write
that data to a location between (as an example) 3.5GB and 4.0GB. The
data never makes it to your real RAM, it gets intercepted by the video
card (or other hardware)

As a result, although your system has 4GB of address space available,
not all of it can be used for RAM.
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

"jbrandonbb@gmail.com" <johnmbrandon.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e4dcbb1-df6a-47ba-89b4-8d5c7cabb590@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 14, 9:34 pm, Paul <nos....TakeThisOut@needed.com> wrote:
>> jbrando....TakeThisOut@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> A problem copying files, could be bad media, bad drive, flaky
>> >> I/O with motherboard, or bad RAM corrupting the decompression.
>> >> (Assuming Vista checks the checksum of the stuff it has
>> >> expanded etc.)
>>
>> >> Paul
>>
>> > Ubuntu installed fine, no problems. I am starting to suspect
>> > motherboard. It just seems like it is giving me grief. I have tried
>> > installing with a different DVD drive, different HDD, etc. Next I will
>> > try with two fewer RAM chips and see if that helps. It's confusing
>> > when Linux installs fine but Windows won't, as though Windows is
>> > trying to do something and is bumping into the same problem. Of
>> > course, I have no overwritten the Linux install in trying to install
>> > Windows again so I will have to re-install again to test out the
>> > testing software you mentioned...
>>
>> > That error does come up in the search, but no one seems to have a
>> > startling remedy...
>>
>> > - JB
>>
>> If you can install Linux, then give Prime95 (mersenne.org) a try. The
>> purpose of running the torture test, is to detect processor or RAM
>> problems.
>> If you use separate directories to hold the executable, you can even
>> run multiple copies (being careful to set the max RAM on each one
>> to a reasonable value).
>>
>> Vista has a problem installing on a 4GB system. One solution
>> is removing some RAM, doing the install, and then putting the
>> RAM back.
>>
>> While running Linux, can you read the entire contents of the Vista
>> media, without a problem ?
>>
>> Paul
>
> One other thing on this nightmare install -- when I try to load XP
> (with the idea that I could upgrade to Vista later) it says "error
> loading operating system" after the first reboot which tells me the
> optical media is fine: why would two different discs produce similar
> errors? I have also used two diff DVD drives, two diff HDDs. The only
> commonality is this BLANK BLANK motherboard.

Are you using the F6 option to load your disk controller drivers?.......XP
will only load them from floppy, so you may need to install one if you don't
have one installed. Vista can install them from a thumb drive or optical
disk.

Ed
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot 

>
> Maybe it would be enough to just change SATA ports on the
> motherboard ?
>
I did try that last night. It is not acting like it is a SATA
controller problem. I just tried copying the Vista disc with another
PC and it had an error during copy, so now I suspect the disc itself
is scratched. I have cleaned it many times though and it does not look
bad, but maybe there is one slight scratch that is making this
happen.
 >> Stay informed about: Computer stops right at boot