🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <QeZCwIxW...@xs4all.nl>,
Wim Verveen <wver...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>In article <DBrHK...@cunews.carleton.ca>,
>cor...@chat.carleton.ca (Christina O'Regan) wrote:
>> Wim Verveen (wver...@xs4all.nl) wrote:
>> > In article <950713193...@agora.carleton.ca>,
>> > cor...@chat.carleton.ca (Christina O'Regan) wrote:
>> > > I suggest that you try removing some non-needed device drivers from
>> > > the installation disk.  For me, it hung as well.  So I simply removed
>> > > some device drivers that did not apply to me, and it worked perfectly.
>> 
>> > Sounds like an interesting suggestion. I will try that out. But I must
>> > say it sounds like a lousy installation procedure. This is the nineties!
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, I know it's not the best installation procedure, but it does work
>> for many systems.  In my opinion, what needs to be improved are the
>> device drivers, not the installation procedure (to much).  It's the
>> device drivers that are hanging because they are recieving errenous
>> results from hardware other than the hardware the device driver is for.
>
>I already suggested somewhere this is the major downside of os/2. They
>have to improve this part will they ever be succesfull

Hey I had this same problem installing NT 3.1 and 3.5 and 3.51.  If
I let it detect my hardware it always locked up, and I use brand name
quality hardware.  If I didn't let it scan and entered stuff my self
it was always alright.  I don't blame OS/2 for this.  Hell when I got
build 490 of W95, which came on CD, I upgraded my system by running
it from the CD which worked fine.  After the install, W95 could no
longer use the CD it installed from, and had no driver to let me
use it again.  Why did they delete the driver from build 490
when it was in build 347.

Marshall Watts
wa...@primenet.com