Quick tutorial for installing the Hewlett Packard HP LaserJet 2100tn printer on Windows.

[Arlen Holder]

****************************************************************************
Quick tutorial for installing the HP LaserJet 2100tn printer on Windows.
Tested today on Windows 10, version 1803 (presumably Win7 will be similar).

As always, please improve so that all benefit from every action taken.

With kind help in the past on this topic from Jonathan N. Little who has
the same printer (AFAIR).
****************************************************************************
Note: If you search the net first, you need to realize that you'll likely
never find any recent solutions which will be successful in
installing the correct printer driver needed, unless you find one
of my older tutorials on this topic - because the Windows Update
process doesn't actually work for this particular printer driver.

Also, if you search for how to archive the printer driver,
you'll find very many utterly useless answers which also don't
work (e.g., suggestions to use Double Driver or similar archival
suites which don't work for printers). Unfortunately, AFAIK, there
is no easy way to archive the printer drivers, once they're
installed. Anyone who says they can hasn't actually done it (IMHO).
============================================================================
Quick summary for how to add a network printer that:
a. Hewlett Packard no longer supplies drivers for the HPLJ 2100TN, and,
b. Windows 10 native doesn't have the drivers either, and, worse, when
c. Windows 10 update also doesn't have any HP LJ 2100tn drivers.
[Note: The "n" stands for "networked" via the printer Ethernet RJ45.]
============================================================================
0. Optionally turn on tracking of file system changes during installation.
(e.g., using Total Uninstall)
1. Start > Settings > Devices > Printers & scanners > Add a printer or scanner
<Loading Image...>
2. This scans for a printer, saying "Searching for printers and scanners"
<Loading Image...>
3. But it will end up saying "The printer that I want isn't listed".
<Loading Image...>
4. Click on that link for "The printer that I want isn't listed".
5. An "Add Printer" form pops up with buttons already selected:
(o) My printer is a little older. Help me find it.
<Loading Image...>
6. Hit [Next]
7. It will say "Searching for available printers..."
<Loading Image...>
8. It will find the printer on the network, so just select it:
HP LaserJet 2100 Series (Hewlett-Packard)
<Loading Image...>
9. Then hit the [Next] button.
10. It will say "(Retrieving a list of all devices)".
<Loading Image...>
10. It will search and then pop up a "Install the printer driver" form.
<Loading Image...>
11. That form won't have the driver you need (don't even bother looking).
12. Instead, click the [Windows Update] button.
<Loading Image...>
13. It will say "Windows is updating the list of printers.
This will take a few minutes (i.e., less than 10 minutes to return).
14. When it returns, it will have a list of printer drivers to choose from
bearing in mind the disorganization that any one company is listed
multiple ways (e.g., HP, Hewlett Packard, and Hewlett-Packard).
15. You won't find the printer under Hewlett Packard or Hewlett-Packard.
16. It will be under "HP" with these choices:
HP LaserJet 2100 PCL6
HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL5 <== I generally choose this one
HP LaserJet 2100 Series PS
<Loading Image...>
17. You can try to install the "HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL 5" driver.
<Loading Image...>
18. Where Windows 10 1803 will "appear" to install the printer driver.
<Loading Image...>
19. But it will error out no matter which HP LJ 2100 driver you choose.
Error: Printer driver was not installed.
<Loading Image...>
20. The workaround is to pick a DIFFERENT printer driver!
For example choose, "HP Laserjet 2200 Series PCL 5 (HP)"
<Loading Image...>
Note: Not all choices work, so try to choose something similar.
21. Let Windows 10 1803 install that (wrong) printer driver instead.
<Loading Image...>
22. Follow through on all the prompts to install that printer driver.
<Loading Image...>
23. As you proceed with the wrong printer driver, you will see the message
"You've successfully added HP LaserJet 2200 Series PCL 5"
<Loading Image...>
24. With the result being that you can now print to the HP LaserJet 2100tn
using that printer driver (i.e., the HP LaserJet 2200 Series PCL 5).
<Loading Image...>
Voila!

As always, please improve so that all benefit from every action taken.
============================================================================
NOTE: Unfortunately, it's nearly impossible (so far) to archive the drivers
once installed, where anyone who suggests DoubleDriver, for example,
has likely never actually used DD to archive HP Laserjet 2100 TN
printer drivers because it doesn't work on that printer driver.
============================================================================
HP References:
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c03521864
HP Printer Administrator Resource Kit 1.8.4 17.7 MB Mar 1, 2018

<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469/model/14918
HP Printer Administrator Resource Kit 17.7 MB PARK-v1.8.4.zip

<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469

<https://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/LaserJet-Printing/Installing-a-HP-LaserJet-2100-for-Windows-10/td-p/5295727>
---------------------------
Checksum information
---------------------------
Name: PARK-v1.8.4.zip
Size: 18515125 bytes (17 MB)

SHA256: 446389DF54FB24EC138E05303AAB5C4FD54D9DD8236DEE65F882C8A058438883

---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
============================================================================
============================================================================

[SilverSlimer]

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 20:27:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder
****************************************************************************
Quick tutorial for installing the HP LaserJet 2100tn printer on Windows.
Tested today on Windows 10, version 1803 (presumably Win7 will be similar).
As always, please improve so that all benefit from every action taken.
With kind help in the past on this topic from Jonathan N. Little who has
the same printer (AFAIR).
****************************************************************************
Note: If you search the net first, you need to realize that you'll likely
never find any recent solutions which will be successful in
installing the correct printer driver needed, unless you find one
of my older tutorials on this topic - because the Windows Update
process doesn't actually work for this particular printer driver.
Also, if you search for how to archive the printer driver,
you'll find very many utterly useless answers which also don't
work (e.g., suggestions to use Double Driver or similar archival
suites which don't work for printers). Unfortunately, AFAIK, there
is no easy way to archive the printer drivers, once they're
installed. Anyone who says they can hasn't actually done it (IMHO).
============================================================================
a. Hewlett Packard no longer supplies drivers for the HPLJ 2100TN, and,
b. Windows 10 native doesn't have the drivers either, and, worse, when
c. Windows 10 update also doesn't have any HP LJ 2100tn drivers.
[Note: The "n" stands for "networked" via the printer Ethernet RJ45.]
============================================================================
0. Optionally turn on tracking of file system changes during installation.
(e.g., using Total Uninstall)
1. Start > Settings > Devices > Printers & scanners > Add a printer or scanner
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn001.jpg>
2. This scans for a printer, saying "Searching for printers and scanners"
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn002.jpg>
3. But it will end up saying "The printer that I want isn't listed".
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn003.jpg>
4. Click on that link for "The printer that I want isn't listed".
(o) My printer is a little older. Help me find it.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn004.jpg>
6. Hit [Next]
7. It will say "Searching for available printers..."
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn005.jpg>
HP LaserJet 2100 Series (Hewlett-Packard)
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn006.jpg>
9. Then hit the [Next] button.
10. It will say "(Retrieving a list of all devices)".
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn007.jpg>
10. It will search and then pop up a "Install the printer driver" form.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn008.jpg>
11. That form won't have the driver you need (don't even bother looking).
12. Instead, click the [Windows Update] button.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn009.jpg>
13. It will say "Windows is updating the list of printers.
This will take a few minutes (i.e., less than 10 minutes to return).
14. When it returns, it will have a list of printer drivers to choose from
bearing in mind the disorganization that any one company is listed
multiple ways (e.g., HP, Hewlett Packard, and Hewlett-Packard).
15. You won't find the printer under Hewlett Packard or Hewlett-Packard.
HP LaserJet 2100 PCL6
HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL5 <== I generally choose this one
HP LaserJet 2100 Series PS
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn010.jpg>
17. You can try to install the "HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL 5" driver.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn011.jpg>
18. Where Windows 10 1803 will "appear" to install the printer driver.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn012.jpg>
19. But it will error out no matter which HP LJ 2100 driver you choose.
Error: Printer driver was not installed.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn013.jpg>
20. The workaround is to pick a DIFFERENT printer driver!
For example choose, "HP Laserjet 2200 Series PCL 5 (HP)"
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn014.jpg>
Note: Not all choices work, so try to choose something similar.
21. Let Windows 10 1803 install that (wrong) printer driver instead.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn015.jpg>
22. Follow through on all the prompts to install that printer driver.
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn016.jpg>
23. As you proceed with the wrong printer driver, you will see the message
"You've successfully added HP LaserJet 2200 Series PCL 5"
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn017.jpg>
24. With the result being that you can now print to the HP LaserJet 2100tn
using that printer driver (i.e., the HP LaserJet 2200 Series PCL 5).
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_hplj2100tn018.jpg>
Voila!
As always, please improve so that all benefit from every action taken.
============================================================================
NOTE: Unfortunately, it's nearly impossible (so far) to archive the drivers
once installed, where anyone who suggests DoubleDriver, for example,
has likely never actually used DD to archive HP Laserjet 2100 TN
printer drivers because it doesn't work on that printer driver.
============================================================================
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c03521864
HP Printer Administrator Resource Kit 1.8.4 17.7 MB Mar 1, 2018
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469/model/14918
HP Printer Administrator Resource Kit 17.7 MB PARK-v1.8.4.zip
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469
<https://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/LaserJet-Printing/Installing-a-HP-LaserJet-2100-for-Windows-10/td-p/5295727>
---------------------------
Checksum information
---------------------------
Name: PARK-v1.8.4.zip
Size: 18515125 bytes (17 MB)
SHA256: 446389DF54FB24EC138E05303AAB5C4FD54D9DD8236DEE65F882C8A058438883
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
============================================================================
============================================================================

I don't have the aforementioned printer so I can't benefit from the
tutorial but it's very cool of you to produce such documentation. Out
of curiosity, do you know if the printer works out of the box in
Linux?

[Arlen Holder]

Post by SilverSlimer
I don't have the aforementioned printer so I can't benefit from the
tutorial but it's very cool of you to produce such documentation. Out
of curiosity, do you know if the printer works out of the box in
Linux?

Thank you for bringing up that point that the tutorial has limited useage,
which I agree with you on (I'm working right now on a Win10 user-interface
tutorial which wlll be much more useful - as I write the tutorials as I
solve the problems and where I'm setting up a new machine to be perfect,
since it was bricked when I tried to remove Cortana's connection to the
web).

As you noted, I realize that this printer-specific tutorial will only
benefit those with legacy printers, where the record shows *lots* of people
have the problem, but no solutions exist (other than the one Jonathan N.
Little and I came up with a year ago).

To be clear, I tried a few of the Microsoft default HP printer drivers, but
the only printer driver that worked on Windows was the one listed in the
tutorial (I didn't bother documenting the multiple failures).

To directly answer your question about Linux, that very same printer works
*perfectly* in Linux - right out of the box - using all the normal printer
setup commands.

Here's what Jonathan N. Little said, verbatim, a year ago about Linux:
"Of course on Linux workstations the printer installs in seconds..."

Where I agree with him.
It was far easier to set up on Linux than it is on Windows.

Here is the exact reference that you might recognize the style of.
Is there a special trick to installing an HP LJ 2100 TN printer on Windows 10?
<http://www.pcbanter.net/showthread.php?t=1101012>

[SilverSlimer]

On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 21:59:26 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
I don't have the aforementioned printer so I can't benefit from the
tutorial but it's very cool of you to produce such documentation. Out
of curiosity, do you know if the printer works out of the box in
Linux?

Thank you for bringing up that point that the tutorial has limited useage,
which I agree with you on (I'm working right now on a Win10 user-interface
tutorial which wlll be much more useful - as I write the tutorials as I
solve the problems and where I'm setting up a new machine to be perfect,
since it was bricked when I tried to remove Cortana's connection to the
web).
As you noted, I realize that this printer-specific tutorial will only
benefit those with legacy printers, where the record shows *lots* of people
have the problem, but no solutions exist (other than the one Jonathan N.
Little and I came up with a year ago).

A lot of people have legacy printers from what I can tell. The printer
is basically a device which _should_ last you a good twenty years
because there is little technology advancement in the area of
printing. Even if they raise the resolution or the speed, people won't
care because the difference isn't as drastic as it was going from
dot-matrix to ink jet and then to laser. The moment you get a laser
printer, there is simply no need to upgrade it and therefore holding
onto an old one (and tutorials such as yours) become incredibly
valuable.

Post by Arlen Holder
To be clear, I tried a few of the Microsoft default HP printer drivers, but
the only printer driver that worked on Windows was the one listed in the
tutorial (I didn't bother documenting the multiple failures).
To directly answer your question about Linux, that very same printer works
*perfectly* in Linux - right out of the box - using all the normal printer
setup commands.
"Of course on Linux workstations the printer installs in seconds..."
Where I agree with him.
It was far easier to set up on Linux than it is on Windows.
Here is the exact reference that you might recognize the style of.
Is there a special trick to installing an HP LJ 2100 TN printer on Windows 10?
<http://www.pcbanter.net/showthread.php?t=1101012>

If the printer is the most valuable part of your computer setup, Linux
serves you a lot better than Windows does. Their hardware support for
older hardware is top-notch and the operating system as a whole is
fantastic for people who don't feel the need to change their computer
every two or three years. I just got a scanner a few months ago and it
is a good improvement over the one I had from 2003 which stopped
functioning. In Windows, it requires you to install the drivers
provided by the manufacturer but in Linux, it works right out of the
box. It's a cheap Canoscan model but it does a beautiful job.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by SilverSlimer
A lot of people have legacy printers from what I can tell.

Yup. When I gave up inkjet printers for laser printers, everything started
lasting a long time!

Post by SilverSlimer
The printer
is basically a device which _should_ last you a good twenty years
because there is little technology advancement in the area of
printing.

I learned that a laser black & white printer was the best because it's so
easy to get refill "dust" that I don't even have to worry about cartridges.

Post by SilverSlimer
Even if they raise the resolution or the speed, people won't
care because the difference isn't as drastic as it was going from
dot-matrix to ink jet and then to laser.

I had them all. Just like everyone else here. I'm done with re-filling the
ink and trying to defeat the arbitrary HP expiry dates on the tanks and
cartridges (depending on the type of printer).

Post by SilverSlimer
The moment you get a laser
printer, there is simply no need to upgrade it and therefore holding
onto an old one (and tutorials such as yours) become incredibly
valuable.

What I learned about laser printers is you can live with black & white
printers for a really long time. Especially if it's networkeed.

When/if the grandkids need color, I can go to a print shop where they have
a machine that you stick your USB stick into, and it makes the color prints
for about 25 cents or so.

The savings in hassle and money in not refilling ink constantly is
fantastic. I will never do color ever again, nor ink (same thing most of
the time).

Post by SilverSlimer
If the printer is the most valuable part of your computer setup, Linux
serves you a lot better than Windows does.

There are two places where Linux easily *kills* Windows, well, three.
1. Linux is freely available and recognizes all the device drivers nowadays
2. Linux handles printing far better than does Windows (surprisingly)
3. Linux handles iOS devices *tremendously better* than does Windows.

It's shocking actually, how much *better* Linux handles iOS devices, where
you just plug in the iOS device and you get *multiple* ways to fully access
the accessible file system, both read and write.

This is Linux access to my iPad:
Loading Image...
This is Windows access to the same iPad:
Loading Image...

Here's the full sequence on Windows:
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
Loading Image...
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows07.jpg

What's amazing is that Linux has a far more powerful and far more seamless
integration to the iOS device than does Windows, all sans the iTunes
abomination.

Post by SilverSlimer
Their hardware support for
older hardware is top-notch and the operating system as a whole is
fantastic for people who don't feel the need to change their computer
every two or three years.

I agree with you that Linux has done an amazing job of being compatible
with device drivers. It didn't use to be that way, as you are well aware
I'm sure. But it's that way now.

Here's that example where Linux works with iOS better than Windows.
Loading Image...

Post by SilverSlimer
I just got a scanner a few months ago and it
is a good improvement over the one I had from 2003 which stopped
functioning. In Windows, it requires you to install the drivers
provided by the manufacturer but in Linux, it works right out of the
box. It's a cheap Canoscan model but it does a beautiful job.

Yup. Same experience here with respect to the HP Laserjet 2100tn, which
neither HP nor Microsoft have the drivers for - and yet - it works just
fine with Linux.

Linux works better with printers and iOS devices than does Windows.
Loading Image...

[SilverSlimer]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 04:56:08 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
A lot of people have legacy printers from what I can tell.

Yup. When I gave up inkjet printers for laser printers, everything started
lasting a long time!

When I got my first inkjet printer in 1999 - an Epson 440 - I really
expected those ink cartridges to last a long time. In the end, I think
you were good for something like 50 pages before you needed to replace
them. Needless to say, that thing ended up in the trash fairly
quickly. I bought a Samsung ML-4500 soon thereafter (gave it away with
a PC I sold), an HP Laserjet 1012 (gave it to my brother) and finally
my current Samsung ML-2510 which has been good to me since 2009. I
have no intention of replacing it anytime soon but luckily, Windows
provides drivers for it.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
The printer
is basically a device which _should_ last you a good twenty years
because there is little technology advancement in the area of
printing.

I learned that a laser black & white printer was the best because it's so
easy to get refill "dust" that I don't even have to worry about cartridges.

That's right. I think we can get a good 2,000 pages from even the
toner they give with the printer when you buy it. I know that the
manufacturer wants us to buy their toner, but I had yet to see a laser
printer stop functioning from my decision to buy much cheaper toner
from a local store. If you're desperate to print something and have no
toner left, just shaking that thing once or twice is likely to get you
what you need for that one specific occasion.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
Even if they raise the resolution or the speed, people won't
care because the difference isn't as drastic as it was going from
dot-matrix to ink jet and then to laser.

I had them all. Just like everyone else here. I'm done with re-filling the
ink and trying to defeat the arbitrary HP expiry dates on the tanks and
cartridges (depending on the type of printer).

I remember when that 24-pin dot matrix printer I got with my IBM PS/1
in 1991 was considering a hot accessory. Even though laser printers
existed at the time (from Apple), they were gigantic and expensive so
24-pin was all the rage even though it was slow as molasses.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
The moment you get a laser
printer, there is simply no need to upgrade it and therefore holding
onto an old one (and tutorials such as yours) become incredibly
valuable.

What I learned about laser printers is you can live with black & white
printers for a really long time. Especially if it's networkeed.
When/if the grandkids need color, I can go to a print shop where they have
a machine that you stick your USB stick into, and it makes the color prints
for about 25 cents or so.
The savings in hassle and money in not refilling ink constantly is
fantastic. I will never do color ever again, nor ink (same thing most of
the time).

If I buy a colour printer in the future, it'll be a laser one but I
have to admit that I'm not keen on the idea of buying four different
toners (three for colour, one for black). A B&W printer is the least
hassle for me.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by SilverSlimer
If the printer is the most valuable part of your computer setup, Linux
serves you a lot better than Windows does.

There are two places where Linux easily *kills* Windows, well, three.
1. Linux is freely available and recognizes all the device drivers nowadays
2. Linux handles printing far better than does Windows (surprisingly)
3. Linux handles iOS devices *tremendously better* than does Windows.
It's shocking actually, how much *better* Linux handles iOS devices, where
you just plug in the iOS device and you get *multiple* ways to fully access
the accessible file system, both read and write.
https://cubeupload.com/im/J98DE4.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows07.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows01.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows02.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows03.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows04.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows05.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows06.jpg
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_iosonwindows07.jpg
What's amazing is that Linux has a far more powerful and far more seamless
integration to the iOS device than does Windows, all sans the iTunes
abomination.

Android support is a lot better than iDevice support but I'm not
surprised that the operating system supports Linux so well. I remember
a time when people in Windows and Mac OS couldn't retrieve media on
their iPods without buying special software *OR* using Linux and their
GTKPod software. It seemed ahead of everyone.

< snip >

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by SilverSlimer
I remember when that 24-pin dot matrix printer I got with my IBM PS/1
in 1991 was considering a hot accessory. Even though laser printers
existed at the time (from Apple), they were gigantic and expensive so
24-pin was all the rage even though it was slow as molasses.

I had a slower but nicer looking 'daisy wheel' printer... Ribbons were $$$$

[Diesel]

Post by SilverSlimer
I remember when that 24-pin dot matrix printer I got with my IBM
PS/1 in 1991 was considering a hot accessory. Even though laser
printers existed at the time (from Apple), they were gigantic and
expensive so 24-pin was all the rage even though it was slow as
molasses.

It was nowhere near as slow as the 9pin technology it was set to
replace. My first printer was a 9pin and it took ages to print
things...

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by SilverSlimer
I don't have the aforementioned printer so I can't benefit from the
tutorial but it's very cool of you to produce such documentation. Out
of curiosity, do you know if the printer works out of the box in
Linux?

Yes. I have a LaserJet 2100 connected to Ubuntu 16.04 server...no
Jetdirect card so connected via parallel port and cups server to share
on network. Just works...

[SilverSlimer]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 02:14:36 -0400, "Jonathan N. Little"

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by SilverSlimer
I don't have the aforementioned printer so I can't benefit from the
tutorial but it's very cool of you to produce such documentation. Out
of curiosity, do you know if the printer works out of the box in
Linux?

Yes. I have a LaserJet 2100 connected to Ubuntu 16.04 server...no
Jetdirect card so connected via parallel port and cups server to share
on network. Just works...

A beautifully flexible operating system if I may say so myself. It's
hard not to appreciate it for that purpose. On the desktop, not as
great but quite acceptable.

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by SilverSlimer
A beautifully flexible operating system if I may say so myself. It's
hard not to appreciate it for that purpose. On the desktop, not as
great but quite acceptable.

I like Unity. Once I got use to it I prefer it to ol GNOME. Have it on
my laptop. Works better than this Win10 Desktop..

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
I like Unity. Once I got use to it I prefer it to ol GNOME. Have it on
my laptop. Works better than this Win10 Desktop..

It has been a while since I used Unity to any great extent, but I hated a
couple of things about it.

The first was that it was difficult, if not impossible, AFAICR, to make
hierarchical menus, bearing in mind that we all do the same things
(archiving, browsing, cleaning, etc.) on all desktops - so I keep the same
hierarchical menus on all platforms.

One quirk I hated was that you could move the window close controls to the
top right (for consistency with dual-boot Linux) except when you full-sized
the windows - in which case the window controls moved inexplicably to the
top left.

I switched to KDE at the time (a few years ago) where KDE could do
anything, but it had its own complexities. I'm looking forward to Gnome but
I haven't used it much yet.

As for refilling printer ink, I was a master at dealing with the complexity
of the expiry dates of the HP D135 way back in the day... and I have a few
tutorials on that process where I wrote everything down to a science (curca
2008).

As I recall, the HP hardware group was big in those days (bigger than now,
anyway), where a guy, I think his name was "HP Bob" or something like that,
who worked for HP, would give us the inside scoop.

That was in the day when companies were either oblivious to Usenet (from a
management control standpoint), or, companies felt it was "free speech"
(which you can't do nowadays if you work for a company).

And yes, I was writing tutorials to help others even then...

http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-hp-hardware
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.hp.hardware/GKuOzns5d1Q/STV-rseeZTEJ>

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
I like Unity. Once I got use to it I prefer it to ol GNOME. Have it on
my laptop. Works better than this Win10 Desktop..

It has been a while since I used Unity to any great extent, but I hated a
couple of things about it.
The first was that it was difficult, if not impossible, AFAICR, to make
hierarchical menus, bearing in mind that we all do the same things
(archiving, browsing, cleaning, etc.) on all desktops - so I keep the same
hierarchical menus on all platforms.

Because Unity was not about hierarchical menus. It is an *alternative*
to hierarchical menus.

Hit the "super' key and start typing what you want to do and the app
will show up "instantly"* in the dash.

*Unlike MS's attempts at replacing the hierarchical menu, Ubuntu finds
stuff quickly and you do not have to *know* the exact name of the
application, just a keyword for what you want to do.

web, internet, browse... will list all web browsers that I have
installed with my preferred listed first. Try that on in Win10...

You can pin frequently used apps to the launcher like Windows does to
the taskbar, but you can just hit the BFB (Big Friggin Button, Ubuntu
icon) and click the application Lens and see your MRU apps, or installed
list, or suggested to install.

BTW neat feature of Unity is if you press and hold the 'super' key a
cheat sheet overlay of Unity hotkeys appears.

Post by Arlen Holder
One quirk I hated was that you could move the window close controls to the
top right (for consistency with dual-boot Linux) except when you full-sized
the windows - in which case the window controls moved inexplicably to the
top left.

Because of the feature when windows are maximized the controls move to
the top panel to maximize application userspace. If they remained on the
right they would interfere with the top panel indicators. So it is a
matter of consistency, something MS abandoned starting with Metro--the
dang mistery-meat navigation! Finding clickable options SHOULD NOT be a
Where's Waldo adventure.

Post by Arlen Holder
I switched to KDE at the time (a few years ago) where KDE could do
anything, but it had its own complexities. I'm looking forward to Gnome but
I haven't used it much yet.

KDE is complex, it is its feature. The complexity allows it to be highly
configurable. If you take the time you can customize your desktop to
your exact liking. May be too overwhelming for newbies. GNOME and Unity
was intentionally simplified.

The beauty of Linux. If you do not like the desktop then you can always
change it and still have the latest OS.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Because Unity was not about hierarchical menus. It is an *alternative*
to hierarchical menus.

This makes sense - and I had not thought of that - so I thank you.

I'm glad you explained that, as it always bothered me immensely that Unity
just didn't do hierarchical menus.

As you can tell, I live and breath hierarchical menus on all my platforms,
whether I'm on...
a. WinXP <Loading Image...>
b. Win10 <Loading Image...>
c. Android <Loading Image...>
d. iOS <Loading Image...>
e. Linux (I just had to rebuild my system so I don't have a screenshot)
etc.

I think a LOT of problems people have are around the menus.

Unfortunately, since people can't find their own stuff, I think a *lot* of
what Microsoft does (e.g., the orthodox Start Menu) and what Canonical did
(e.g., Unity) was because people just couldn't think ahead to figure out
what kind of hierarchy they wanted for their menus.

In that regard, I like that when I had installed KDE on Ubuntu it came with
a hierarchical menu (as I recall), which, of course, I completely changed,
where it wasn't at first intuitive how to change it - but I managed to make
it exactly like my Windows XP (and now Win10) Cascade Menu.

This works simply because we all do the same things on our desktops.

Googling for some of my old Linux threads on the topic, I find these:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/NAL0vqWCdrM[1-25]>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/yEotRf0TgCA/BkJ50EVbtr0J>
<>
etc.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Hit the "super' key and start typing what you want to do and the app
will show up "instantly"* in the dash.

I understand that a *lot* of the overhead of both Microsoft and Canonical
was because people couldn't find stuff - so they both default to a 'search
like' interface.

As you probably know, I *never* run searches since I know where everything
is (it's in the same place today as it was a decade ago, no matter what
machine I'm currently on).

So I abhor those search mechanisms (Cortana included).

Of course, when I tried to disable Cortana-to-Bing a week or two ago, it
bricked my system, and I had to start all over ... so .... I have to learn
to just leave those search mechanisms alone. :)

Post by Jonathan N. Little
*Unlike MS's attempts at replacing the hierarchical menu, Ubuntu finds
stuff quickly and you do not have to *know* the exact name of the
application, just a keyword for what you want to do.

Currently I have Ubuntu 17.10, where I think I'll try the new Gnome-based
18.04. One problem I have with "new" operating systems is that I tweak the
hell out of them, which means I find more bugs than I want to find.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/cXjgh_OR1z8/aui_Wywi2C4J;context-place=msg/alt.os.linux/9PFcIDGUgyc/I4JZnjvZ6cQJ>

So it drives me nuts to touch any desktop operating system within the first
year of release because I find something like a dozen bugs simply because I
do customization stuff that most people don't do.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/oBrpXdQsdI0/RxSPx3paFCcJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>

So I was holding off on the Gnome-based Ubuntu - but since the Cortana hack
bricked my dual-boot system, I may as well install the latest Ubuntu to see
how it works now that they killed off Unity.

But that means I'm going to find a dozen bugs that they didn't catch in
testing, since it happens every time I touch a new operating system,
because I don't do what everyone else does.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
web, internet, browse... will list all web browsers that I have
installed with my preferred listed first. Try that on in Win10...

On Windows 10, I have a browser hierarchy that is pretty well organized,
where it's task based and framework based, as shown below ... so I don't
need a search engine just to find my own stuff - but I do realize most
people can't find anything (which is the biggest problem I think).
<Loading Image...>

Post by Jonathan N. Little
You can pin frequently used apps to the launcher like Windows does to
the taskbar, but you can just hit the BFB (Big Friggin Button, Ubuntu
icon) and click the application Lens and see your MRU apps, or installed
list, or suggested to install.
BTW neat feature of Unity is if you press and hold the 'super' key a
cheat sheet overlay of Unity hotkeys appears.

Still - Unity had those lousy "mac-like" Window controls (as I recall),
where it was super obnoxious that they wouldn't stay in the spot you told
them to stay (it's a bug - but they never fixed it). (Drove me nuts.)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/of1a6cN13wI/Z52uGuSXgMUJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>

I like a good quick easy-to-manage by drag and drop cascade menu - exactly
like what Windows XP always had and what Windows 10 has now.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Because of the feature when windows are maximized the controls move to
the top panel to maximize application userspace. If they remained on the
right they would interfere with the top panel indicators. So it is a
matter of consistency, something MS abandoned starting with Metro--the
dang mistery-meat navigation! Finding clickable options SHOULD NOT be a
Where's Waldo adventure.

I think this is my thread on the topic, years ago:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/of1a6cN13wI/Z52uGuSXgMUJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>

The point is that a dual-boot system wants the window controls in the same
corner on both operating systems. Since Windows can't change the corner
easily, Ubuntu should change the corner.

That's fine. Ubuntu does that. But Unity doesn't. Unity "bounces" the
window controls all over the place (see the thread above).

I don't care where the window controls are, but they need to:
a. Stay in the same spot for all windows, and, they need to
b. Be consistently in the same corner for dual-boot systems.

That's a reasonable request which Unity didn't fulfill.
I'm not here to complain - I'm happy Unity died.
I ran into so many bugs using it that it drove me nuts.

KDE had bugs too - but far fewer than did Unity (IMHO).

We all do the same things on all our desktops:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/mn_jtuvtwOA/uPJ2W4waAwAJ>

Post by Jonathan N. Little
KDE is complex, it is its feature. The complexity allows it to be highly
configurable. If you take the time you can customize your desktop to
your exact liking. May be too overwhelming for newbies. GNOME and Unity
was intentionally simplified.

I agree with you that KDE was tremendously complex, and powerful.
It really didn't do hierarchical menus all that well though.
And I had troubles with changing the icons, just as I do on Windows:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/gSwjq-FTCOM/mDI-fnTeCQAJ>

The point is that most menu systems suck.
The one that worked great was Windows XP; but that's long gone.

I'm right now trying to get Windows 10 to behave, but it even has problems
since I've been testing the icons for "Tor" and "Onion" where the binary
tiled database for the orthodox menu doesn't respect the icons I created.

Just like what happened in Linux! :)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/NAL0vqWCdrM/GgVeymHOU20J>

Post by Jonathan N. Little
The beauty of Linux. If you do not like the desktop then you can always
change it and still have the latest OS.

Yup. I love Linux for its power of customization.
I'll see if I can dual boot Gnome's Ubuntu when I set that up.

Currently I'm trying to set up Windows 10 without having to resort to
WinAero and Classic Shell.

I'm only beginning to get accustomed to the Windows 10 orthodox Start Menu,
but I do have the Windows 10 Cascade Menu pretty much figured out.
<Loading Image...>

Notice the "trick" of the dashed lines to get around the bug that the Win10
Cascade Menu piles up on top of itself (or is that a feature?).

Also notice that I need to figure out how to change the icons that show up
in the Windows 10 orthodox Start Menu so that I can tell folders apart
without having to have their names always be there (which requires medium
sized icons or larger).

So I have a *lot* of work ahead of me to try to tame the Windows 10
interface, which is kind of sad since Windows XP was just fine in that
regard (I don't have a touch screen).

[Jonathan N. Little]

<snip>

Post by Arlen Holder
But that means I'm going to find a dozen bugs that they didn't catch in
testing, since it happens every time I touch a new operating system,
because I don't do what everyone else does.

Depends. Not all of what you call "bugs" are bugs.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
web, internet, browse... will list all web browsers that I have
installed with my preferred listed first. Try that on in Win10...

On Windows 10, I have a browser hierarchy that is pretty well organized,
where it's task based and framework based, as shown below ... so I don't
need a search engine just to find my own stuff - but I do realize most
people can't find anything (which is the biggest problem I think).
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_win10_browser.jpg>

I have a tendency to install lots of applications. For XP I organized my
menu by tasks: Office work, Graphics and Design, Programing, etc... Now
my data I have organized hierarchically and I have tons of data, but
your multi-deep menu just to find a web browser, well I prefer to in Unity:

"Super" key > "web" > enter and my SeaMonkey is launching.

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
You can pin frequently used apps to the launcher like Windows does to
the taskbar, but you can just hit the BFB (Big Friggin Button, Ubuntu
icon) and click the application Lens and see your MRU apps, or installed
list, or suggested to install.
BTW neat feature of Unity is if you press and hold the 'super' key a
cheat sheet overlay of Unity hotkeys appears.

Still - Unity had those lousy "mac-like" Window controls (as I recall),
where it was super obnoxious that they wouldn't stay in the spot you told
them to stay (it's a bug - but they never fixed it). (Drove me nuts.)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/of1a6cN13wI/Z52uGuSXgMUJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>
I like a good quick easy-to-manage by drag and drop cascade menu - exactly
like what Windows XP always had and what Windows 10 has now.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Because of the feature when windows are maximized the controls move to
the top panel to maximize application userspace. If they remained on the
right they would interfere with the top panel indicators. So it is a
matter of consistency, something MS abandoned starting with Metro--the
dang mistery-meat navigation! Finding clickable options SHOULD NOT be a
Where's Waldo adventure.

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/of1a6cN13wI/Z52uGuSXgMUJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>
The point is that a dual-boot system wants the window controls in the same
corner on both operating systems. Since Windows can't change the corner
easily, Ubuntu should change the corner.
That's fine. Ubuntu does that. But Unity doesn't. Unity "bounces" the
window controls all over the place (see the thread above).

I have explained why the controls are on the left.

Post by Arlen Holder
a. Stay in the same spot for all windows, and, they need to

They do. on the right.

Post by Arlen Holder
b. Be consistently in the same corner for dual-boot systems.

Fix Windows then.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Depends. Not all of what you call "bugs" are bugs.

Understood.

Some are features. Others are just the way it works.
Some are just annoyances that the developers don't bother to work on.
And some are bugs.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
I have a tendency to install lots of applications. For XP I organized my
menu by tasks: Office work, Graphics and Design, Programing, etc... Now
my data I have organized hierarchically and I have tons of data, but
"Super" key > "web" > enter and my SeaMonkey is launching.

Understood.

But that's also why you have *multiple* access methods, all of which are
enabled at the time of installation which is the purpose of this tutorial):
* Tutorial for setting up a well-organized consistent efficient menu system
* Message-ID: <pfo1kd$het$***@news.mixmin.net>

NOTE: I provided the message id because PC Banter doesn't seem to have
archived the tutorial at http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10

Every ap can easily be run by any of these half-dozen methods:
a. Task bar (single click)
b. Run Box (click & type)
c. Cortana (click & type)
d. Heterodox Start Menu (multi-click)
e. Cascade Menu (multi-click)
f. Orthodox Start Menu (multi-click)

The first three are essentially direct with a single click; while the next
three are hierarchical with a logical multi-click process.

All work just fine (once you get the system well organized).

That's how (IMHO) a well-designed system is set up, strategically.
Tactically you choose whatever method is best for you for each program.

For example, you'll notice I mostly have web browsers in my taskbar, and
that I edit the HOSTS file with the Run Box, and that I have most of my
editors in the multi-click menu systems, etc.

It's all part of the strategic plan.
There's nobody who can access a program faster or in fewer clicks than I
can, simply because *every* program can be accessed in a single click, and
yet, every program is also in the proper location in multiple hierarchical
menus.

It's the best of all worlds - with the main drawback being you have to
design it to work since Windows (or Linux) doesn't work this well out of
the box.

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by Arlen Holder
b. Be consistently in the same corner for dual-boot systems.

Fix Windows then.

Understood.
Compared to KDE for example, Windows is basically not customizable.

Note: I need to get back to testing the solutions on that other thread.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Depends. Not all of what you call "bugs" are bugs.

Understood.

Some are features. Others are just the way it works.
Some are just annoyances that the developers don't bother to work on.
And some are bugs.

I understand your point of view which is perfectly valid.

Post by Jonathan N. Little
I have a tendency to install lots of applications. For XP I organized my
menu by tasks: Office work, Graphics and Design, Programing, etc... Now
my data I have organized hierarchically and I have tons of data, but
"Super" key > "web" > enter and my SeaMonkey is launching.

Understood.

But that's also why you have *multiple* access methods, all of which are
enabled at the time of installation which is the purpose of this tutorial):
* Tutorial for setting up a well-organized consistent efficient menu system
* Message-ID: <pfo1kd$het$***@news.mixmin.net>

NOTE: I provided the message id because PC Banter doesn't seem to have
archived the tutorial at http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10

Every ap can easily be run by any of these half-dozen methods:
a. Task bar (single click)
b. Run Box (click & type)
c. Cortana (click & type)
d. Heterodox Start Menu (multi-click)
e. Cascade Menu (multi-click)
f. Orthodox Start Menu (multi-click)

The first three are essentially direct with a single click; while the next
three are hierarchical with a logical multi-click process.

All work just fine (once you get the system well organized).

That's how (IMHO) a well-designed system is set up, strategically.
Tactically you choose whatever method is best for you for each program.

For example, you'll notice I mostly have web browsers in my taskbar, and
that I edit the HOSTS file with the Run Box, and that I have most of my
editors in the multi-click menu systems, etc.

It's all part of the strategic plan.
There's nobody who can access a program faster or in fewer clicks than I
can, simply because *every* program can be accessed in a single click, and
yet, every program is also in the proper location in multiple hierarchical
menus.

It's the best of all worlds - with the main drawback being you have to
design it to work since Windows (or Linux) doesn't work this well out of
the box.

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by Arlen Holder
b. Be consistently in the same corner for dual-boot systems.

Fix Windows then.

Understood.
Compared to KDE for example, Windows is basically not customizable.

Note: I need to get back to testing the solutions on that other thread.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Arlen Holder
Currently I have Ubuntu 17.10, where I think I'll try the new Gnome-based
18.04. One problem I have with "new" operating systems is that I tweak the
hell out of them, which means I find more bugs than I want to find.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/cXjgh_OR1z8/aui_Wywi2C4J;context-place=msg/alt.os.linux/9PFcIDGUgyc/I4JZnjvZ6cQJ>
So it drives me nuts to touch any desktop operating system within the first
year of release because I find something like a dozen bugs simply because I
do customization stuff that most people don't do.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/oBrpXdQsdI0/RxSPx3paFCcJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>
So I was holding off on the Gnome-based Ubuntu - but since the Cortana hack
bricked my dual-boot system, I may as well install the latest Ubuntu to see
how it works now that they killed off Unity.

For future reference, this thread is an example of why I don't like to
touch an operating system for at least a year after release - as the bugs
have to be worked out.

Why doesn't Ubuntu 18.04 ask to install next to Windows 10 Pro single HDD as a dual boot?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/D7E7FQ1NLNk[1-25]>

It's debatable whether this is a bug or feature where Ubuntu won't present
the screen to ask to install alongside of Windows if there is any "RAID
dung" on the hard drive (Ubuntu erroneously thinks it's a "degraded RAID"
but Ubuntu never says a word about it) - but - if I wait a year for a
thousand other people to have the same problem - then I don't have to
uncover it (with your help) here. :)

[Paul]

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder
Currently I have Ubuntu 17.10, where I think I'll try the new Gnome-based
18.04. One problem I have with "new" operating systems is that I tweak the
hell out of them, which means I find more bugs than I want to find.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/cXjgh_OR1z8/aui_Wywi2C4J;context-place=msg/alt.os.linux/9PFcIDGUgyc/I4JZnjvZ6cQJ>
So it drives me nuts to touch any desktop operating system within the first
year of release because I find something like a dozen bugs simply because I
do customization stuff that most people don't do.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.os.linux/oBrpXdQsdI0/RxSPx3paFCcJ;context-place=forum/alt.os.linux>
So I was holding off on the Gnome-based Ubuntu - but since the Cortana hack
bricked my dual-boot system, I may as well install the latest Ubuntu to see
how it works now that they killed off Unity.

For future reference, this thread is an example of why I don't like to
touch an operating system for at least a year after release - as the bugs
have to be worked out.
Why doesn't Ubuntu 18.04 ask to install next to Windows 10 Pro single HDD as a dual boot?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.os.linux/D7E7FQ1NLNk[1-25]>
It's debatable whether this is a bug or feature where Ubuntu won't present
the screen to ask to install alongside of Windows if there is any "RAID
dung" on the hard drive (Ubuntu erroneously thinks it's a "degraded RAID"
but Ubuntu never says a word about it) - but - if I wait a year for a
thousand other people to have the same problem - then I don't have to
uncover it (with your help) here. :)

But you did learn something though, didn't you ?

The lesson you learned is:

When you receive a machine, *always* review the
BIOS settings before using it.

That's the lesson.

Sometimes you review the settings, because you
just changed the BIOS battery or something. That's
a good reason to visit the BIOS.

Say for example, you just acquired a motherboard which is
known to apply excessive voltages when certain "auto-overclock"
functions are selected. Then it would pay to review
the settings and prevent that from happening. Maybe the
motherboard came from Ebay or something - overclockers
sell their "broken" hardware on Ebay to get rid of it
(stuff damaged by electromigration).

In this case, at least some people know the correct
contexts for "IDE" versus "AHCI" versus "RAID". You
shouldn't use RAID, unless the plan is to actually
use RAID. Some products, the driver kit allows
a transition from AHCI to RAID later, and then
you have a reason to select AHCI.

If you're on WinXP, and hate manually adding a
driver at install time, then the "IDE" setting
is your friend. That's why this computer has
*always* been set to IDE. AHCI only pays dividends
for server loads, where there is a queuing buildup.
At higher gueue depth, AHCI is better. But typical
desktop user situations, AHCI overhead exceeds any
savings due to no queue building up. With my IDE
setting, every crusty OS I own runs on this machine.

Paul

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Paul
But you did learn something though, didn't you ?

Indeed, thanks mostly to you, Carlos, and William Unruh, I did learn a
*lot*. I wished I hadn't learned it the hard way though... :)

Wolf K. knew everything already ... if only I had asked him! :)

Post by Paul
When you receive a machine, *always* review the
BIOS settings before using it.

This is VERY TRUE.

I'm gonna turn off that damn "SATA Controller Mode" RAID setting every time
I see it!

I have *two* machines that I got secondhand ... so I'll look at the second
one (which is the one I'm using to type this) to see if it also contains
RAID dung in an inaccessible location on the hard drive.

Give me a moment to reboot ... and figure out the BIOS keyboard key...

Ah, good. There's no mention whatsoever of that darn RAID stuff!
<Loading Image...>

Post by Paul
That's the lesson.

Yes. The lesson is that you don't want anything to do with RAID if you're
not actually using RAID, simply because RAID dung works fine with Windows
but Ubuntu will consider the disk "degraded".

And, if you switch off of SATA controller mode from RAID to AHCI, then
Windows will refuse to boot.

Catch 22.

Post by Paul
In this case, at least some people know the correct
contexts for "IDE" versus "AHCI" versus "RAID". You
shouldn't use RAID, unless the plan is to actually
use RAID. Some products, the driver kit allows
a transition from AHCI to RAID later, and then
you have a reason to select AHCI.

Yup. Basically don't use RAID or IDE but if you already have a SATA
Controller Mode set to RAID, then you have a catch 22 situation.

You can't just change the controller mode because Windows won't boot and
you can't leave it as it is because Ubuntu won't install.

Post by Paul
If you're on WinXP, and hate manually adding a
driver at install time, then the "IDE" setting
is your friend. That's why this computer has
*always* been set to IDE.

Interesting on the use of IDE. Thanks.

Post by Paul
AHCI only pays dividends
for server loads, where there is a queuing buildup.
At higher gueue depth, AHCI is better. But typical
desktop user situations, AHCI overhead exceeds any
savings due to no queue building up. With my IDE
setting, every crusty OS I own runs on this machine.

Interesting.
Should I have set my SATA Controller Mode to IDE instead then?

Notice what the second used desktop says for the controller mode:
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Paul
But you did learn something though, didn't you ?

Indeed, thanks mostly to you, Carlos, and William Unruh, I did learn a
*lot*. I wished I hadn't learned it the hard way though... :)

Wolf K. knew everything already ... if only I had asked him! :)

Post by Paul
When you receive a machine, *always* review the
BIOS settings before using it.

This is VERY TRUE.

I'm gonna turn off that damn "SATA Controller Mode" RAID setting every time
I see it!

I have *two* machines that I got secondhand ... so I'll look at the second
one (which is the one I'm using to type this) to see if it also contains
RAID dung in an inaccessible location on the hard drive.

Give me a moment to reboot ... and figure out the BIOS keyboard key...

Ah, good. There's no mention whatsoever of that darn RAID stuff!
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

Post by Paul
That's the lesson.

Yes. The lesson is that you don't want anything to do with RAID if you're
not actually using RAID, simply because RAID dung works fine with Windows
but Ubuntu will consider the disk "degraded".

And, if you switch off of SATA controller mode from RAID to AHCI, then
Windows will refuse to boot.

Catch 22.

Post by Paul
In this case, at least some people know the correct
contexts for "IDE" versus "AHCI" versus "RAID". You
shouldn't use RAID, unless the plan is to actually
use RAID. Some products, the driver kit allows
a transition from AHCI to RAID later, and then
you have a reason to select AHCI.

Yup. Basically don't use RAID or IDE but if you already have a SATA
Controller Mode set to RAID, then you have a catch 22 situation.

You can't just change the controller mode because Windows won't boot and
you can't leave it as it is because Ubuntu won't install.

Post by Paul
If you're on WinXP, and hate manually adding a
driver at install time, then the "IDE" setting
is your friend. That's why this computer has
*always* been set to IDE.

Interesting on the use of IDE. Thanks.

Post by Paul
AHCI only pays dividends
for server loads, where there is a queuing buildup.
At higher gueue depth, AHCI is better. But typical
desktop user situations, AHCI overhead exceeds any
savings due to no queue building up. With my IDE
setting, every crusty OS I own runs on this machine.

Interesting.
Should I have set my SATA Controller Mode to IDE instead then?

Notice what the second used desktop says for the controller mode:
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

[Paul]

Post by Arlen Holder
Interesting.
Should I have set my SATA Controller Mode to IDE instead then?
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

Another poster has claimed that TRIM works in the MS IDE driver
as well as the MS AHCI (storahci?) driver. It's possible the
IDE option is a viable one, once you've verified TRIM is available
for SSDs as a result.

IDE is mainly a choice so you can easily load up WinXP or Win2K.

Paul

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Paul

Post by Arlen Holder
Interesting.
Should I have set my SATA Controller Mode to IDE instead then?
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

Another poster has claimed that TRIM works in the MS IDE driver
as well as the MS AHCI (storahci?) driver. It's possible the
IDE option is a viable one, once you've verified TRIM is available
for SSDs as a result.
IDE is mainly a choice so you can easily load up WinXP or Win2K.

Hi Paul,
You constantly use words I don't know and which only Wolf K. knows! :)
TRIM?

<https://forum-en.msi.com/faq/article/ide-sata-and-ahci-all-you-need-to-know>
"The TRIM command is dependent on the SSD itself, and the operating
system supporting it. It is not dependent on the host controller, and AHCI
is not a requirement. TRIM is natively supported in Windows 7, as well as
Linux since kernel 2.6.33."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM
"A trim command (known as TRIM in the ATA command set, and UNMAP in the
SCSI command set) allows an operating system to inform a solid-state drive
(SSD) which blocks of data are no longer considered in use and can be wiped
internally."

Just to be clear, all my drives are spinning disks (AFAIK).
So am I correct that TRIM doesn't apply to my old-desktop situation?

[Paul]

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Paul

Post by Arlen Holder
Interesting.
Should I have set my SATA Controller Mode to IDE instead then?
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=18_sata-controller-mode.jpg>

Another poster has claimed that TRIM works in the MS IDE driver
as well as the MS AHCI (storahci?) driver. It's possible the
IDE option is a viable one, once you've verified TRIM is available
for SSDs as a result.
IDE is mainly a choice so you can easily load up WinXP or Win2K.

Hi Paul,
You constantly use words I don't know and which only Wolf K. knows! :)
TRIM?
<https://forum-en.msi.com/faq/article/ide-sata-and-ahci-all-you-need-to-know>
"The TRIM command is dependent on the SSD itself, and the operating
system supporting it. It is not dependent on the host controller, and AHCI
is not a requirement. TRIM is natively supported in Windows 7, as well as
Linux since kernel 2.6.33."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM
"A trim command (known as TRIM in the ATA command set, and UNMAP in the
SCSI command set) allows an operating system to inform a solid-state drive
(SSD) which blocks of data are no longer considered in use and can be wiped
internally."
Just to be clear, all my drives are spinning disks (AFAIK).
So am I correct that TRIM doesn't apply to my old-desktop situation?

Sometimes when I provide info, it's in the hope that
your platform can handle more than one kind of device.
TRIM isn't used or needed for traditional HDD, but
is useful for SSDs. Originally, some SSDs had their
own less-than-ideal garbage collectors, but TRIM was
an attempt to provide "perfect info" for the purposes
of flash location management.

SSD for C: , is an essential part of the Win10 experience.
Not because I want it to be, but because all the maintenance
activity on a regular HDD is just "too much". It becomes
too slow.

Even with an SSD, a Win10 machine will find other
excuses for "wheel spin". For example, during boot, I did
a trace on my Win10 setup, where 20 seconds was wasted doing
nothing obvious. The CPU was railed - doing what, who knows ?
It was supposed to be booting. While they may have had some plan to
randomize or encrypt RAM, I don't know if that's what I was
seeing or not.

TRIM isn't needed for a machine which will only
have HDD in it. You don't have to worry about it.
And HDD aren't going anywhere yet. Seagate has
closed a hard drive plant, due to declining sales
volume - it's difficult to say whether there
is a finite amount of porn to drive sales. I
think the Seagate president made some statement
like that.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/seagates-ex-ceo-bill-watkins-too-blunt-for-his-own-good/

"For example, in a 2006 Fortune interview at a dinner event,
Watkins unleashed what was perhaps his most quotable line:

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building
a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn."
"

So there you have it - if a Seagate plant closes, it
has to be traceable (somehow) to porn.

Paul

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Paul
TRIM isn't needed for a machine which will only
have HDD in it. You don't have to worry about it.

Whew.

Well, the good news is that both my new-to-me towers, each with new HDDs,
are NOT set up for RAID (whew!).

Thanks for all your kind and expert help!

Like you, I try to always give more than asked for, and I try to make it so
that anyone can follow more easily in our footsteps than it took me!

[SilverSlimer]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 09:41:15 -0400, "Jonathan N. Little"

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by SilverSlimer
A beautifully flexible operating system if I may say so myself. It's
hard not to appreciate it for that purpose. On the desktop, not as
great but quite acceptable.

I like Unity. Once I got use to it I prefer it to ol GNOME. Have it on
my laptop. Works better than this Win10 Desktop..

I don't like Unity too much. It does a decent job, but I like bringing
my mouse cursor to the top-left and having it automatically show me
all open application windows and the dock rather than having a dock
constantly present and needing to click on an icon for that
functionality. To me, there is truly nothing wrong with Gnome but I
appreciate Canonical trying to make the operating system more
"accessible" to regular users.

I have to mention that Ubuntu itself is pretty solid now. The previous
version couldn't handle my Bluetooth chip (kept giving errors on
boot-up and no "fix" worked) but the latest version seems to work out
of the box with everything. It's truly stellar in the hardware
detection respect.

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by SilverSlimer
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 09:41:15 -0400, "Jonathan N. Little"

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by SilverSlimer
A beautifully flexible operating system if I may say so myself. It's
hard not to appreciate it for that purpose. On the desktop, not as
great but quite acceptable.

I like Unity. Once I got use to it I prefer it to ol GNOME. Have it on
my laptop. Works better than this Win10 Desktop..

I don't like Unity too much. It does a decent job, but I like bringing
my mouse cursor to the top-left and having it automatically show me
all open application windows and the dock rather than having a dock
constantly present and needing to click on an icon for that
functionality. To me, there is truly nothing wrong with Gnome but I
appreciate Canonical trying to make the operating system more
"accessible" to regular users.

I kind of liked the click expose windows. Maybe old eyes are a factor.
Also Linux does and has done multiply desktop right!

Post by SilverSlimer
I have to mention that Ubuntu itself is pretty solid now. The previous
version couldn't handle my Bluetooth chip (kept giving errors on
boot-up and no "fix" worked) but the latest version seems to work out
of the box with everything. It's truly stellar in the hardware
detection respect.

In defense Bluetooth can be a bit wonky independent of the OS. I am
kinda pissed that Canonical abandoned Unity. I felt is was truly
maturing well. Would have loved it on my phone over android.

[Arlen Holder]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
In defense Bluetooth can be a bit wonky independent of the OS. I am
kinda pissed that Canonical abandoned Unity. I felt is was truly
maturing well. Would have loved it on my phone over android.

I concur with everyone that Ubuntu is truly great at two things that Linux
didn't used to be good at.

1. It recognizes almost all my hardware (if not all of it), and,
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

It's truly amazing how well Ubuntu accesses the Windows file system, but as
Paul is well aware, Microsoft is continually screwing with the NTFS
overlays such that Linux has problem with some of the "special" files
inside the Windows System32 folder (e.g., wuaueng.dll).

Certainly Ubuntu handled the HP LaserJet 2100 printer drivers far better
than did Windows.

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by Arlen Holder
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

Not had any problem accessing Windows file system via Linux in 20+
years. Now the first time I used Ubuntu in 07 did make installing dual
boot painless, whereas it was more manual with other distros.

[Paul]

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by Arlen Holder
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

Not had any problem accessing Windows file system via Linux in 20+
years. Now the first time I used Ubuntu in 07 did make installing dual
boot painless, whereas it was more manual with other distros.

Try it on a Windows 10 C: after 16299.125.

1) Disable Fast Start or use powercfg /h off.
This stops Linux mount rejection due to suspected active hiberfil.sys.
This issue has been around for a long while, so
is nothing new.

2) compact /compactos:never to decompress
compressed system files, removing reparse points
that Linux cannot read. You do that in Windows,
before firing up Linux.

CompactOS was apparently around in Windows 8.1, but
they're using it in 16299.125 or later, in a more
aggressive manner. They're using it on hard drives,
where they should not be using it (no need).

Those are examples of challenges now.

You can still have problems with compacted files
which are *not* in system areas. As well as having
problems with other variants of reparse points
sprinkled elsewhere.

Expect to see a few error messages, now and then.
Be ready for anything :-(

On a pure NTFS data partition, yeah, works great.

Paul

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by Paul

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by Arlen Holder
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

Not had any problem accessing Windows file system via Linux in 20+
years. Now the first time I used Ubuntu in 07 did make installing dual
boot painless, whereas it was more manual with other distros.

Try it on a Windows 10 C: after 16299.125.
1) Disable Fast Start or use powercfg /h off.
   This stops Linux mount rejection due to suspected active hiberfil.sys.
   This issue has been around for a long while, so
   is nothing new.

When I shutdown I want it shutdown. First thing I disable. It is not
just Linux that has an issue when suspected active hiberfil.sys, when
things go pear-shaped you'll want to be able to fix things.

Post by Paul
2) compact /compactos:never to decompress
   compressed system files, removing reparse points
   that Linux cannot read. You do that in Windows,
   before firing up Linux.

IIRC "My Documnents" et. al., just look like detached files. Yes, Linux
will not traverse them, but the real path still works. Where you would
have issue would be if you moved c:\Users\USERNAME\documents will break
"My Documnents" in Windows but you can fix it in Windows...

Post by Paul
   CompactOS was apparently around in Windows 8.1, but
   they're using it in 16299.125 or later, in a more
   aggressive manner. They're using it on hard drives,
   where they should not be using it (no need).

Not tested it.

Post by Paul
Those are examples of challenges now.
You can still have problems with compacted files
which are *not* in system areas. As well as having
problems with other variants of reparse points
sprinkled elsewhere.

Why would you compacted files now with drives so cheap? I don't miss
Stacker or DriveSpace at all. Bitch to fool with when something when wrong.

Post by Paul
Expect to see a few error messages, now and then.
Be ready for anything :-(
On a pure NTFS data partition, yeah, works great.

Which should be when dealing with data. Especially if you want to share
it with another OS.

I do recall one thing that Linux access to NTFS did occur. When fixing
corrupted infected systems moving data via Linux to a fixed system the
8.3 short filenames were missing when listing via the command prompt.

[Paul]

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Which should be when dealing with data. Especially if you want to share
it with another OS.
I do recall one thing that Linux access to NTFS did occur. When fixing
corrupted infected systems moving data via Linux to a fixed system the
8.3 short filenames were missing when listing via the command prompt.

I just remembered another barrier.

If you create a partition with Windows 10, the
result is a damaged $MFTMIRR. Creating partitions
with Win7 or Win8/8.1 is OK.

TestDisk can fix that, but the problem is a damn nuisance.
A casual application of CHKDSK doesn't fix it.

The solution someone in Fedora proposed, was to
stop checking $MFTMIRR and just comment out the
code doing the check before mount.

So if you see a comment about $MFTMIRR, that's
not a hardware issue...

Paul

[Jonathan N. Little]

Post by Paul

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Which should be when dealing with data. Especially if you want to
share it with another OS.
I do recall one thing that Linux access to NTFS did occur. When fixing
corrupted infected systems moving data via Linux to a fixed system the
8.3 short filenames were missing when listing via the command prompt.

I just remembered another barrier.
If you create a partition with Windows 10, the
result is a damaged $MFTMIRR. Creating partitions
with Win7 or Win8/8.1 is OK.
TestDisk can fix that, but the problem is a damn nuisance.
A casual application of CHKDSK doesn't fix it.
The solution someone in Fedora proposed, was to
stop checking $MFTMIRR and just comment out the
code doing the check before mount.
So if you see a comment about $MFTMIRR, that's
not a hardware issue...

The short take-a-way is MS filesystems are flaky piles of <insert your
favorite scatological reference here>

[Paul]

Post by Jonathan N. Little

Post by Paul

Post by Jonathan N. Little
Which should be when dealing with data. Especially if you want to
share it with another OS.
I do recall one thing that Linux access to NTFS did occur. When
fixing corrupted infected systems moving data via Linux to a fixed
system the 8.3 short filenames were missing when listing via the
command prompt.

I just remembered another barrier.
If you create a partition with Windows 10, the
result is a damaged $MFTMIRR. Creating partitions
with Win7 or Win8/8.1 is OK.
TestDisk can fix that, but the problem is a damn nuisance.
A casual application of CHKDSK doesn't fix it.
The solution someone in Fedora proposed, was to
stop checking $MFTMIRR and just comment out the
code doing the check before mount.
So if you see a comment about $MFTMIRR, that's
not a hardware issue...

The short take-a-way is MS filesystems are flaky piles of <insert your
favorite scatological reference here>

The takeaway is "they're doing stuff to the file system without
changing the version number". NTFS continues to be version 3.1,
but they keep messing with it in Windows 10. Strictly speaking,
busting $MFTMIRR is breaking the rules. The other changes
amount to "painting within the lines", even if it isn't
a good idea.

Paul

[SilverSlimer]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:54:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
In defense Bluetooth can be a bit wonky independent of the OS. I am
kinda pissed that Canonical abandoned Unity. I felt is was truly
maturing well. Would have loved it on my phone over android.

I concur with everyone that Ubuntu is truly great at two things that Linux
didn't used to be good at.
1. It recognizes almost all my hardware (if not all of it), and,
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

What I find interesting with Linux is that it often does a better job
recognizing hardware when it is on a LiveUSB key than when it's
installed. For instance, my Bluetooth chip works fine with Ubuntu
while it's not installed but once it is - according to posts made by
people who have the same hardware - the operating system doesn't
contain the firmware necessary to get it running. Inconsistency is
still, unfortunately, an issue.

Post by Arlen Holder
It's truly amazing how well Ubuntu accesses the Windows file system, but as
Paul is well aware, Microsoft is continually screwing with the NTFS
overlays such that Linux has problem with some of the "special" files
inside the Windows System32 folder (e.g., wuaueng.dll).

One thing few people mention is how the NTFS file system tends to
break perfectly usable files with time. For instance, an MP3 you just
put in a directory but never touched will suddenly corrupt and you
have to restore a previous version. I've had that happen to me several
times. Linux's file systems have no such bit rot from what I can
tell.

Post by Arlen Holder
Certainly Ubuntu handled the HP LaserJet 2100 printer drivers far better
than did Windows.

Once the open-source drivers are in the kernel, they remain there
forever. Only support for very old GPUs ever seems to be removed but I
don't believe their drivers are open anyway.

[Paul]

Post by SilverSlimer
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:54:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
In defense Bluetooth can be a bit wonky independent of the OS. I am
kinda pissed that Canonical abandoned Unity. I felt is was truly
maturing well. Would have loved it on my phone over android.

I concur with everyone that Ubuntu is truly great at two things that Linux
didn't used to be good at.
1. It recognizes almost all my hardware (if not all of it), and,
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

What I find interesting with Linux is that it often does a better job
recognizing hardware when it is on a LiveUSB key than when it's
installed. For instance, my Bluetooth chip works fine with Ubuntu
while it's not installed but once it is - according to posts made by
people who have the same hardware - the operating system doesn't
contain the firmware necessary to get it running. Inconsistency is
still, unfortunately, an issue.

Firmware, where the redistribution rights are unknown, cannot
be bundled into the OS. My TV Tuner card has this problem. The
solution was to re-master a LiveDVD and add the firmware file myself.

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Arlen Holder
It's truly amazing how well Ubuntu accesses the Windows file system, but as
Paul is well aware, Microsoft is continually screwing with the NTFS
overlays such that Linux has problem with some of the "special" files
inside the Windows System32 folder (e.g., wuaueng.dll).

One thing few people mention is how the NTFS file system tends to
break perfectly usable files with time. For instance, an MP3 you just
put in a directory but never touched will suddenly corrupt and you
have to restore a previous version. I've had that happen to me several
times. Linux's file systems have no such bit rot from what I can
tell.

If you have bitrot, check your system memory.

When I started getting Macrium Reflect backups with bad
checksums (as detected by Macrium on Verify or Restore),
the root cause was bad RAM.

There is no bitrot here, with the exception of my
ruined backups. Once the RAM was fixed, I was
getting good backup files. I've just run off
another set, and will be running Verify on them
later today.

One other thing to keep in mind, there *has*
been malware which buggers multimedia files
as a form of defacement. That's another way an
MP3 could be edited behind your back.

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Arlen Holder
Certainly Ubuntu handled the HP LaserJet 2100 printer drivers far better
than did Windows.

Once the open-source drivers are in the kernel, they remain there
forever. Only support for very old GPUs ever seems to be removed but I
don't believe their drivers are open anyway.

Xorg removes *open source* drivers. Every time a driver needs
to be re-jigged for the latest software structure change, it
takes designer effort. Older drivers are then thrown away
as "too much work" or "too hard to test". That's where the
S3 driver I use in VPC2007 went.

The situation on proprietary drivers isn't much better.
You can have a driver in "legacy" status which works just
fine. Every time a new kernel comes in, DKMS incorporates
the legacy driver. However, the drivers are marked with
a "kernel range", and if a driver said "valid up to kernel
3.13" and you just installed 3.14, then the proprietary
video driver cannot be added to the kernel level.

Only if a "legacy" driver is reviewed and edited by
its owner (i.e. legacy driver under *constant* support),
would it continue to work via the DKMS mechanism.

There was a time when the notion of "they remain there forever"
was an accurate description, but that's not true any more.

On an older system, the single biggest stink will revolve
around your video card.

Distros with a good approach are Puppy and FatDog64, and
once you dump the driver they're using for X, you'll understand
why. There won't be any hardware acceleration, but, it'll work.
It's a basic "frame buffer" approach, and since those distros
don't use Compiz, there's no added bloat required for
desktop operation. Using a simplified DE and a simplified
video solution, works wonders. Puppy is suited to a computer
from the year 2000, while FatDog64 is for a machine from 2015
(in terms of driver support). But those distros aren't
for everyone. If you have a "hobbyist" mindset, they'll
suit you fine.

Paul

[SilverSlimer]

Post by Paul

Post by SilverSlimer
On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 21:54:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder

Post by Arlen Holder

Post by Jonathan N. Little
In defense Bluetooth can be a bit wonky independent of the OS. I am
kinda pissed that Canonical abandoned Unity. I felt is was truly
maturing well. Would have loved it on my phone over android.

I concur with everyone that Ubuntu is truly great at two things that Linux
didn't used to be good at.
1. It recognizes almost all my hardware (if not all of it), and,
2. It accesses the Windows file system (in dual-boot configuration).

What I find interesting with Linux is that it often does a better job
recognizing hardware when it is on a LiveUSB key than when it's
installed. For instance, my Bluetooth chip works fine with Ubuntu
while it's not installed but once it is - according to posts made by
people who have the same hardware - the operating system doesn't
contain the firmware necessary to get it running. Inconsistency is
still, unfortunately, an issue.

Firmware, where the redistribution rights are unknown, cannot
be bundled into the OS. My TV Tuner card has this problem. The
solution was to re-master a LiveDVD and add the firmware file myself.

Here's the funny part though: the Bluetooth works _beautifully_ on the
LiveUSB instance. I know because I bought Bluetooth earbuds a few
weeks ago and while Windows' BT support was not working right (turned
out it was a bad driver), I figured I'd boot into Linux, see if the
support works first and then verify if maybe my BT chip itself was
defective. It worked fine in Linux and then worked fine in Windows
when I tried a different driver. However, that same operating system,
when installed, decides to use a different driver for Linux once
installed for whatever reason which screws it up entirely. It causes
some sort of error message wherein it claims that it can't find the
firmware and shuts down all support which, strangely, worked fine
before it was installed.

Post by Paul

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Arlen Holder
It's truly amazing how well Ubuntu accesses the Windows file system, but as
Paul is well aware, Microsoft is continually screwing with the NTFS
overlays such that Linux has problem with some of the "special" files
inside the Windows System32 folder (e.g., wuaueng.dll).

One thing few people mention is how the NTFS file system tends to
break perfectly usable files with time. For instance, an MP3 you just
put in a directory but never touched will suddenly corrupt and you
have to restore a previous version. I've had that happen to me several
times. Linux's file systems have no such bit rot from what I can
tell.

If you have bitrot, check your system memory.
When I started getting Macrium Reflect backups with bad
checksums (as detected by Macrium on Verify or Restore),
the root cause was bad RAM.
There is no bitrot here, with the exception of my
ruined backups. Once the RAM was fixed, I was
getting good backup files. I've just run off
another set, and will be running Verify on them
later today.
One other thing to keep in mind, there *has*
been malware which buggers multimedia files
as a form of defacement. That's another way an
MP3 could be edited behind your back.

Nah, this wasn't malware but it might have been bad RAM. I've only
seen it happen on a user-built desktop I've since given to my cousin.
I remember checking the RAM but maybe a problem surfaced after that
verification.

Post by Paul

Post by SilverSlimer

Post by Arlen Holder
Certainly Ubuntu handled the HP LaserJet 2100 printer drivers far better
than did Windows.

Once the open-source drivers are in the kernel, they remain there
forever. Only support for very old GPUs ever seems to be removed but I
don't believe their drivers are open anyway.

Xorg removes *open source* drivers. Every time a driver needs
to be re-jigged for the latest software structure change, it
takes designer effort. Older drivers are then thrown away
as "too much work" or "too hard to test". That's where the
S3 driver I use in VPC2007 went.
The situation on proprietary drivers isn't much better.
You can have a driver in "legacy" status which works just
fine. Every time a new kernel comes in, DKMS incorporates
the legacy driver. However, the drivers are marked with
a "kernel range", and if a driver said "valid up to kernel
3.13" and you just installed 3.14, then the proprietary
video driver cannot be added to the kernel level.
Only if a "legacy" driver is reviewed and edited by
its owner (i.e. legacy driver under *constant* support),
would it continue to work via the DKMS mechanism.
There was a time when the notion of "they remain there forever"
was an accurate description, but that's not true any more.
On an older system, the single biggest stink will revolve
around your video card.
Distros with a good approach are Puppy and FatDog64, and
once you dump the driver they're using for X, you'll understand
why. There won't be any hardware acceleration, but, it'll work.
It's a basic "frame buffer" approach, and since those distros
don't use Compiz, there's no added bloat required for
desktop operation. Using a simplified DE and a simplified
video solution, works wonders. Puppy is suited to a computer
from the year 2000, while FatDog64 is for a machine from 2015
(in terms of driver support). But those distros aren't
for everyone. If you have a "hobbyist" mindset, they'll
suit you fine.

I've heard of Puppy but never bothered to use it. It's nice that
someone is still considering the fact that some people have archaic
machines and refuse to give them up but I can't imagine that the
distribution has that much of a user base.

[Frank Slootweg]

Post by Arlen Holder
****************************************************************************
Quick tutorial for installing the HP LaserJet 2100tn printer on Windows.
Tested today on Windows 10, version 1803 (presumably Win7 will be similar).

Windows 7 is not similar, because for Windows 7, HP *does* supply a
driver. That's mentioned on the very page you found/referenced:

When I search 'Support' -> 'Software & Drivers' - > 'Printer' for 'HP
LaserJet 2100tn', I get

'Software and driver results for: HP LaserJet 2100tn Printer'
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469/model/14918>
(i.e. the same page you found/referenced)

which lists drivers for Windows 7 (and 8.1 and earlier to XP and even to
3.x).

In any case, whatever HP printer driver you're looking for, you can
always look for a similar newer (or older) printer with comparable
features and - most importantly - the same PCL* level. After all, that
is why HP developed (HP) PCL in the first place.

[...]

[Frank Slootweg]

This little piece of shit profoundly apologizes for polluting Mr.
EMAKs authored thread by adding value to it, technical value, to add
insult to injury.

This little piece of shit is delighted to note that Mr. EMAK has -
rightfully so - ignored this little piece of shit's added value. After
all, this little piece of shit wouldn't want Mr. EMAK to have to also
'forget' this instance of this little piece of shit having the audacity
to add value to one of Mr. EMAKs authored threads. Such 'forgetfulness'
could be interpreted as lying and we wouldn't want that to happen, now
would we!?

This little piece of shit also profoundly apologizes to Bob_S, who is
apparently still on Mr. EMAKs ever so short list of non-POS, for making
a technical suggestion which partly resembles Bob_S's contribution.

Had this little piece of shit known that Bob_S would make a similar
suggestion, this little piece of shit would have kept his mouth shut
like little pieces of shit are supposed to.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

LPOS.

Post by Frank Slootweg

Post by Arlen Holder
****************************************************************************
Quick tutorial for installing the HP LaserJet 2100tn printer on Windows.
Tested today on Windows 10, version 1803 (presumably Win7 will be similar).

Windows 7 is not similar, because for Windows 7, HP *does* supply a
When I search 'Support' -> 'Software & Drivers' - > 'Printer' for 'HP
LaserJet 2100tn', I get
'Software and driver results for: HP LaserJet 2100tn Printer'
<https://support.hp.com/us-en/drivers/selfservice/hp-laserjet-2100-printer-series/25469/model/14918>
(i.e. the same page you found/referenced)
which lists drivers for Windows 7 (and 8.1 and earlier to XP and even to
3.x).
In any case, whatever HP printer driver you're looking for, you can
always look for a similar newer (or older) printer with comparable
features and - most importantly - the same PCL* level. After all, that
is why HP developed (HP) PCL in the first place.
[...]

[Bob_S]

snip of great tutorial.....

Arlen,

You could add this additional / alternative step in the tutorial which is
often overlooked simply because HP doesn't really advertise it as a solution
for unsupported printers. The problems with unsupported networked printers
can be daunting but they are also the work-horses used by many small
businesses and solutions can be found in most cases.

You will need to navigate thru the HP site to get to the printer support for
software and drivers and then simply do a search for "PCL5" or
"Driver-Universal Print Driver". You will find universal PCL5 and PCL6
drivers as well as universal PostScript drivers.

For unsupported network capable printers or ones using a print server, I go
with the PCL5 selection since it has proven to work the best for older
printers but I have had PCL6 also work. As you probably already know, there
are other supported printers that their drivers and feature sets are close
enough that they will be "somewhat" backward compatible with older printers.
I've gone down that rabbit hole a number of times for my clients only to end
up installing the PCL5 Universal Driver.

One of the major problems for using a universal driver is that it does not
get updated for all the changes made to pdf documents. Techs that I support
have to print pages from online pdf documents and get the error printed out
that the page is not supported. I forget the actual wording but the
solution is simple enough - power cycle the printer and the print server if
you are using one like an old NetGear PSUS4. That has worked although I
can't explain why. It may be the print server or the printer or
combination.

This may help:
https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c04324001

So adding a "Universal Printer Driver" section as an alternative may be
useful.

Bob S.

[Arlen Holder]

*UPDATE SOLUTION!*

Windows 10 legacy printer installation for the HP LaserJet 2100 seems to
have gotten worse recently, according to my experience and that of others,
where Windows Update will no longer even give you a choice of similar
drivers for the HP LJ 2100.
The [Windows Update] button for legacy printers has been dead for weeks
<http://alt.comp.os.windows-10.narkive.com/1C8HOEOU/the-windows-update-button-for-legacy-printers-has-been-dead-for-weeks>

However, SC Tom and this note below provide a *better* solution than this:
<http://alt.comp.os.windows-10.narkive.com/yKNzX4YR/quick-tutorial-for-installing-the-hewlett-packard-hp-laserjet-2100tn-printer-on-windows>

It seems that the Windows Update is failing for others who are seeking
drivers for legacy printers based on this report I just read:
April 6, 2018:
Windows 10 Printer Lists - unable to update printer list from Windows Update
<https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-hardware/windows-10-printer-lists-unable-to-update-printer/3cad241e-b999-46d2-9515-e1ca628d0ef9>

*The simple solution is to give up on the Windows Update method!*

Instead, switch to the Microsoft Catalog Download Method!
<http://www.catalog.update.microsoft.com/Search.aspx?q=hp%20laserjet%202100>

The beauty of this "Windows Catalog" method is that it allows you to
archive the printer drivers as a "cab" file, so you do not have to go
through the "Windows Update" abomination ever again (if you save the cab
files of course).

The cab file for the "HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL 5", Windows x64, is:
<http://download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/driver/drvs/2009/07/4188_bacd1413e93b4a6362d9a2ca653c869f1c02f6f7.cab>

And the cab file for the "HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL6", Windows x64, is:
<http://download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/driver/drvs/2009/07/4189_1228a7cf7b1aac21346b20cb6e21db409dde9e72.cab>

They even have a 32-bit WinXP cab file from HP & not from Microsoft!
<http://www.download.windowsupdate.com/msdownload/update/v3-19990518/cabpool/7449448.cab>

You extract that cab file using 7zip or equivalent, which creates:
.\Amd64\{lots of DLL,CFG,INI,DTD,EXP,GPD,HPI,ICM,ICC,NTF,PPD,XML files}
component.man
prnhp001.cat
prnhp001.Inf

When the Windows 10 printer settings gui asks "Install the printer driver"
you select "Have Disk" and browse to that extracted "prnhp001.Inf" file.

The Windows printer setup GUI asks you to choose a printer from the list:
[HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL5]

Voila!

When you install that printer driver and run the test page, a list results
of the drivers that were installed, which you can take note of:
Additional Print Driver Files:
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZLSLHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZSSLHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZUILHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPCDMCLH.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZ5RLHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZSMLHN.GPD
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZSTLHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPMCPD25.CFG
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZ5CLHN.INI
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPMCPDP5.XML
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZSCLHN.DTD
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZEVLHN.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZIDR12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZINW12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZIPM12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZIPR12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZIPT12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPZISN12.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPBMIAPI.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPBMINI.DLL
C:\Windows\system32\spool\DRIVERS\x64\3\HPBOID.DLL
etc.

In summary, the following are useful to note:
1. The "Windows Update" is failing to get *any* driver list lately
2. Even if it did work, it's impossible *save* the driver archive
3. The Windows Catalog method solves both those problems instantly