Re: Using Compatibility Wizard

Malke,

Your comments are well received. In my case, the "scolding" :-) isn't really
well placed, though. I am fanatical to the max about my system maintenance,
security, etc, etc. Conferring on this issue alone included numerous hours
with the local tech who is a networking ace as well as a
stockholder/advisor/friend of mine who is a Silicon Valley genuine former
"senior engineer" with Sun Micro, Borland, and half a dozen other major
names. Nobody for a moment suspects I'm not more than on top of proper
configuration, maintenance, etc. It really is "hopefully" just this one
program... and I've conferred with some top GM people and they agree it is
quite a bit of an undertaking I'm looking at to upgrade since I'm at the same
time looking to redo the structure itself.

Actually, now that I think about it, you have motivated me to at least look
into that upgrade issue again. Maybe I can live with the minor imperfections
that will result for the time being, and overhaul the upgraded version when
I'm ready to deal with it. At least that minimizes the chance that I get
fatal corruption of the database from continuing to limp along with what I
have.

So, yes, your scolding may have been more well-placed that I had first
thought.

Thanks for the advice and coaxing, really!!

Jay




"Malke" wrote:

> Chigongman wrote:
>
> See my comments inline:
>
> >
> > Thanks so much.
>
> You're welcome ;-)
> >
> > So, can I at least take comfort in your experience, Malke, that this
> > is a basic problem of running an old version of GM under XP and
> > probably isn't anything wrong with my OS per se?
>
> I don't know about "taking comfort". Remember, this isn't *my*
> experience; it is the experience of an attorney client of mine and they
> did *not* find that their ancient version of Goldmine worked well with
> XP. They needed to upgrade. I don't know how much money or time it cost
> because the Goldmine tech support people did this for the client and I
> wasn't involved.
>
> > I do occasionally get
> > quote/bubble messages above the SysTray saying "Your network is now
> > reconnected again" or something to that effect, usually right before
> > or after GM acts up by saying it can't find the database, and I've
> > been assuming/hoping that that's just a reaction to GM having its
> > issues. I never have networking issues other than that.
>
> I have no way of knowing whether the above is coming from Goldmine or
> not. A wise move would be to have a local computer professional come
> on-site and look at your computers and your network setup. This isn't
> really something you can solve via Usenet postings. You need on-site
> help and this is a cost of doing business. Naturally, the cost depends
> on where you live, but it should not be very expensive to do this. Ask
> yourself if your company's computing health is worth spending a few
> hundred dollars (or less). Think about whether you would fritter that
> amount of money away on something less important than your company's
> data security.
>
> >
> > I'm really hoping GM continues to maintain its integrity through these
> > glitches. It has done so thus far, to the extent that I can tell.
> > Sometimes I get an endless loop of error messages saying files can't
> > be found, are Read Only, are Locked, etc, and I have to close the
> > program with less than elegant smoothness, but so far it has not shown
> > any signs of damage/corruption. I run the Maintenance Wizard to do a
> > full reindex as well as rebuild/pack/sort/verify pretty frequently,
> > and I don't know if it fixes things or has nothing to fix. At least I
> > know it's never said it found something it can't fix.
>
> Databases get corrupted. This is a fact. You have been lucky. I hope you
> are backing up regularly onto removable media.
>
> >
> > I'll have to do that upgrade soon, I know. For now, financial and time
> > resources have to go elsewhere. This will not be a simple upgrade
> > procedure.
>
> Maybe it will be simpler than you think. Maybe it won't. See my
> "penny-wise-pound-foolish" comments in the paragraph above. These are
> your choices; just give some thought to what would happen if you have
> to manually rebuild everything. Please don't take my comments as
> "scolding" (although they are, a little, but only out of concern for
> you) - it is just that I have lots of small businesses as clients and I
> have seen first-hand what happens to them when their owners won't spend
> a relatively small amount of money on their systems and:
>
> 1. Run old systems
> 2. Don't maintain the systems
> 3. Don't do any proper backups
> 4. Don't have any security/virus/etc. protection
> 5. Wait until there is a crisis and believe me, there *will* be a crisis
> eventually.
>
> > I'm not clear on the reason to try Virtual PC... not sure I understand
> > the steps but, moreover, the reason. What if it tests out okay. Then
> > what would I be doing?
>
> Virtual PC is a program that you run on your new host machine that
> enables you to create virtual machines running different operating
> systems. Virtual PC "tricks" the other operating systems into thinking
> they are running on a standalone machine, all by themselves. For
> instance, I have a host machine running XP Pro and have virtual
> machines running DOS 6.2, Win3.1, Win95, Win98SE, and OS/2. Each
> virtual machine operating system is a *real* operating system,
> installed just like you would on a standalone machine. The advantage is
> that if there is a program that you really need that only runs under
> (say) Windows 95, you can make a virtual machine of Win95 and install
> that program and use it. Here's a link to Virtual PC's homepage for
> more information:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx
>
> Malke
> --
> Elephant Boy Computers
> www.elephantboycomputers.com
> "Don't Panic!"
> MS-MVP Windows - Shell/User
>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: why SP2?
    ... Because XP2 goes way beyond just security. ... It is an upgrade to the ... operating system. ... a complete rewrite of thousands of lines of operating ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: why SP2?
    ... It is an upgrade to the ... > operating system. ... a complete rewrite of thousands of lines of operating ... >> Norton Internet Security already installed in my pc. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: [Fwd: Re: How secure is Preupgrade? Answer: Not.]
    ... But it's not being marketed as an alternative to an Anaconda HTTP install with less downtime as the only improvement. ... It's being marketed as a safer alternative to a live upgrade with Yum, and as a faster, more convenient and less bandwidth-wasting alternative to downloading and burning DVD images. ... The article talks a lot about how Preupgrade is better than both a Yum upgrade and a DVD-based upgrade, but says very little about network-based Anaconda upgrades, and it's completely silent about the security aspect. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: IE6 vs IE& vs IE8 on SBS
    ... But you'd have to be executing that code, either by downloading it or by installing it and in such cases I doubt IE7 will help you much. ... If true, this makes me wonder if there isn't some of the aforementioned security problems present in any OS that has IE6 or earlier installed, active or not. ... But I tend to always ask the inverse of any question like this: Is there a solid reason *to* upgrade? ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: regretting upgrade from ME to XP Home
    ... second hard drive, as I suggested, and possibly not for extra RAM ... the system requirements for this upgrade and thought I was OK, ... you can't uninstall an operating system. ... an entry in Add/Remove Programs. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers)