I am beginning with prom burning, and I noticed that on the pocket programmer site, they dont list Win2000 as a supported platform. Is anybody using it with Win2000 successfully?

 

I contacted Xtronics about this, I was referred to George (913) 422-2094 at Xtronics to find out when it will be ready. I never called, I just switch the programmer to my 98SE machine, works great! You can also boot to DOS from a DOS disk, that works too.

 

I couldn't get it to work with Win2K either. It could never find the programmer. I just use my laptop w/ win98se to program.

------------------
87 IROC-Z 305 TPI gears, exhaust, converter
14.70 at 94.1 mph
Solid Roller Minirammed 377 - It's Alive !!!

 

The problem is that xtronics program is of a primative design. Win2k doesn't let just any program have direct access to ports that would connect it to the "outside." I have a program that might let me work around this but I haven't had a chance to play with it. If I figure it out I'll repost.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

I recently got the Pocket Programer too. I had the same problem with an error that the Programer could not be found. I am running Windows ME and for me at least, I have found a fix. I copied the whole disk onto my hard drive. Before I want to use the Programmer I open the FILEPROM program from the disk and then go through and exit without doing anything. Then I go back and open the Pocket Programer in Windows. After FILEPROM has been opened in my DOS promt the Programer will open and find the Programmer just fine in Windows. It worked for me, try it.

Ryan

 

That's not going to help with win2000. Win ME is win98 with a facelift. Win2000 is based on NT technology and it is a totally different operating system. Win2000 is a much more secure os and it just doesn't let homemade programs access any port directly.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

I realllllllllly beg to differ with that last post, win2k is NOT secure compaired to win98. Windows 98 did have an armload of bugs, you could remotely crash it all day long, however windows 2000 has bugs that allow you ACCESS to the system, and to network resorces, read up on IIS someday, anywho, back to burning there are programs which allow you to install things as though it was a win98 install. good luck!

------------------
1985 IROC-Z
TPI 305, 700R4 with shift kit, richmond 3.73's, auburn pro series posi, crane compucam 2030, ported plenum, gutted air boxes, all the little insignificant stuff.

 

You can beg and differ all you want but there is no getting around that fact that win2000 supports NTSF file security and win98 DOESN'T. If you want to talk about computers visit hardocp, you can argue till your blue in the face just don't ever tell me win98 is more secure than win2000 unless you're high on some good **** .
I know this is a stupid argument but win2000 is by far a better OS than win98, most of the new viruses don't even know the work arounds of win2000 because of all the unique directory names and read-only files (unless you sign on as administrator!). Win98 and Win2000 at two different breeds.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

Windows 98 is more secure than windows 2000
(this was typed from a win2k machine)
------------------
1985 IROC-Z
TPI 305, 700R4 with shift kit, richmond 3.73's, auburn pro series posi, crane compucam 2030, ported plenum, gutted air boxes, all the little insignificant stuff.

[This message has been edited by IROC-Z_85 (edited August 16, 2001).]

 

"That's some good **** Ray!"
Let me just say that you are making a total idiot out of yourself. Don't try and play computer "I know better" with a guy going to school for computer science. Let me quote this next link which might prove enlightening to you and the rest of the win2000 haterz (this was typed from my win2000/win98 dual boat machine). "Moreover, WinMe is not as stable or secure as Win2000 or WinNT, nor is it designed to support corporate networks of any size." <a href="http://www.smartcomputing.com/editcat/SMART/OPERATING+SYSTEMS/311/15247/">Go and visit the link to the full article if you wish to read more.</a>

Oh yeah, and if you read anything from the microsoft website they'll even prove it in their <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/professional/evaluation/whyupgrade/default.asp">top 10 reasons to go to win2000</a>. It's reason #6.
I rest my case.

------------------
, Jon (350 TBI!)
91 Red My website

 

Dont try to tell a SYSTEMS ADMIN who's JOB (after going to school) is allllllll about security, and what OS is more secure. (this is being typed from a dual booting WIN2k/Linux machine) and Im far from a win2k hater, i think its the best thing microsoft has done to date, even though i spend the majority of the time in linux. Go to any internet security site such as slashdot.com and read about IIS, or other "servers" that you can run from win2k professional or advanced server, read how you can browse someones computer over the internet with a default misconfiguration, then look on 98, see if you then can remotely exploit a default install of 98 to browse, gain administrative privledges, or compromise the machine OTHER than a DoS attack. IT CAN'T BE DONE. Now you can take your link and stuff it because I'd be the first to say that winME was the worst damn operating system ever to hit the market, I'd rather run REDHAT than that Pile. Now good luck when you hit the industry little school boy, I hope you become a competetor of mine, and i hope alllllllll your stuff is hosted from windows machines. As far as what this thread was POSTED for, when you aren't talking about network security win2k is an awesome OS, and there are plenty of work arounds for installs i've yet to try to run a pocket programmer from it, but should I do so I'll make a new post on how it was achieved. again good luck!

------------------
1985 IROC-Z
TPI 305, 700R4 with shift kit, richmond 3.73's, auburn pro series posi, crane compucam 2030, ported plenum, gutted air boxes, all the little insignificant stuff.

[This message has been edited by IROC-Z_85 (edited August 17, 2001).]