PsiWinitis CURED!!!!!
RJCT
now, thanks to methodical use of "enditall" (see thread below "Best serial
port settings to cure PsiWinitis".
On my machine it is an app called "Wfxmod32" which causes the blockage. I
have set Enditiall to protect all my normally running apps except Wfxmod32
and the four PsiWin apps that open when you first connect. Now when I press
Enditall, I can quickly shut down the blockage and make a fresh connection
without rebooting. I can go online again and then reconnect without a
reboot - fantastic!
What is odd about this however is that it only works if Wfxmod32 is shut
down by Enditall. If I shut down Wfxmod32 and the PsiWin apps manually using
CTL+ALT+DEL then this workaround does not work.
--
RJCT
--------
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>I've managed to isolate the program that causes PsiWinitis on my machine
>now, thanks to methodical use of "enditall" (see thread below "Best serial
>port settings to cure PsiWinitis".
>
>On my machine it is an app called "Wfxmod32" which causes the blockage. I
>have set Enditiall to protect all my normally running apps except Wfxmod32
>and the four PsiWin apps that open when you first connect. Now when I press
>Enditall, I can quickly shut down the blockage and make a fresh connection
>without rebooting. I can go online again and then reconnect without a
>reboot - fantastic!
i believe that is a WinFax utility - do you use WinFax? have you ever
used WinFax?
sounds like WinFax has been preventing PsiWin from using the serial
port...
confirms, in my mind, that PsiWin gets a lot of criticism here for
"just not working" when some other piece of software is causing a
clash.
glad to hear you have a solution.
see you
ali
RJCT
"Alasdair Manson" <ali_m...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b28dca1....@news.pacbell.net...
buy a PC dedicated to backing up the Psion? Symbian should design around
software conflicts. Winfax is hardly an obscure piece of software after all.
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Yes it is Winfax. But I don't absolve PsiWIn of blame. Do they expect us to
>buy a PC dedicated to backing up the Psion? Symbian should design around
>software conflicts. Winfax is hardly an obscure piece of software after all.
do you have a garage? if you come home and want to park in your garage
space and somebody has their car parked there is that you or your
car's fault?
you get the other person to move their car, right?
i agree that it would nice for PsiWin to say "i can't use the serial
port because somebody is parked in my space" but with a platform as
shaky as windows, very often, the OS will tell an application one
thing (e.g. the serial port is fine) when, in actual fact, it's not.
if you installed PsiWin first and WinFax wasn't working because PsiWin
was parked in its space, would you be blaming PsiWin or WinFax?
see you
ali
Mike Smith
>
> i agree that it would nice for PsiWin to say "i can't use the serial
> port because somebody is parked in my space" but with a platform as
> shaky as windows, very often, the OS will tell an application one
> thing (e.g. the serial port is fine) when, in actual fact, it's not.
I don't buy this. I've done a fair amount of COM port programming on Win16
and/or Win32, and I wouldn't consider this sort of behavior acceptable.
There's no excuse, IMO, for PsiWin just going out to lunch if there's a COM
port conflict; it should just come out and *say* so.
--
Mike Smith
RJCT
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 18:59:20 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Yes it is Winfax. But I don't absolve PsiWIn of blame. Do they expect us
to
> >buy a PC dedicated to backing up the Psion? Symbian should design around
> >software conflicts. Winfax is hardly an obscure piece of software after
all.
>
> do you have a garage? if you come home and want to park in your garage
> space and somebody has their car parked there is that you or your
> car's fault?
Stupid analogy. PsiWin doesn't "own" the serial port.
> if you installed PsiWin first and WinFax wasn't working because PsiWin
> was parked in its space, would you be blaming PsiWin or WinFax?
>
I did install PsiWin first.
And why don't5 Psion technical support at least make the suggestion that
Winfax may interfere with the serial port? I can't be the first person to
have discovered this conflict. And in any case, my ancient version of PsiWin
(can't remember the number, maybe 2.0) used to have no problem with Winfax
so the problem cannot be isurmountable.
Alasdair Manson
<smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>There's no excuse, IMO, for PsiWin just going out to lunch
>...
>it should just come out and *say* so.
PsiWin doesn't "go out to lunch" - it is just unable to make a
connection and it tells the user exactly that.
i agree that it could be improved by suggesting that something else
might be using the serial port - a common problem.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Stupid analogy. PsiWin doesn't "own" the serial port.
with respect, just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it
stupid. WinFax doesn't own the serial port either but it moved into
yours and wouldn't let others play.
>I did install PsiWin first.
so PsiWin doesn't interfere with WinFax. hmmm...
>And why don't5 Psion technical support at least make the suggestion that
>Winfax may interfere with the serial port?
indeed - have you dropped them a line to let them know so that they
can add that to their list of things to suggest to users? if not,
might you?
see you
ali
Mike Smith
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:25:36 -0400, "Mike Smith"
> <smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>
> >There's no excuse, IMO, for PsiWin just going out to lunch
> >...
> >it should just come out and *say* so.
>
> PsiWin doesn't "go out to lunch" - it is just unable to make a
> connection and it tells the user exactly that.
On my machine (dual PIII-850, Win2K) it takes over 10 seconds for PsiWin to
come back with an error message. If the error is due to a port conflict,
there's no reason it should take this long - the call to CreateFile() within
PsiWin should return immediately with a share violation.
--
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
news:2ibiitssualkkgo1o...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 17:14:42 -0400, "Mike Smith"
> <smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>
> >On my machine (dual PIII-850, Win2K) it takes over 10 seconds for PsiWin
to
> >come back with an error message. If the error is due to a port conflict,
> >there's no reason it should take this long - the call to CreateFile()
within
> >PsiWin should return immediately with a share violation.
>
what
> you're describing going on. The only other explaination would appear to be
> that there's a *deliberate* pause of 10 secs added ;-)
>
> Assuming that's not the case, what in your opinion might the developers
have
> put in there that would explain the 10 seconds delay? A timeout? 10 secs
worth
> of retrys?
Not really sure. One possibility would be that PsiWin is grabbing the port
OK, but not configuring it correctly. On my machine, that's not likely, as
I have no other COM port-using programs running. But it could be happening
in other cases. PsiWin connects, does something, and disconnects. Then
another program grabs the port, changes its state, does something, and
disconnects. Perhaps when PsiWin grabs the port again, it expects it to be
in the same state in which it left it?
Another possibility would be that PsiWin *is* getting an error back from
Windows when it grabs the port, but isn't handling it properly, so it goes
on its merry way, trying to read/write to a invalid COM port handle, then
just gives up...?
--
Mike Smith
RJCT
>
> It's unlikely to be a software conflict. Sounds more like a configuration
> problem. Possibilities:
>
> 1) PsiWin and WinFax have been configured to use the same COM port.
> 2) WinFax has been set to search all ports for the modem. Equivalent to
#1.
> 3) PsiWin has been set to search all ports for the modem. Equivalent to
#1.
> 4) PsiWin and WinFax have been configured to use different COM ports, but
the
> two COM ports are using the same IRQ. (By default COM 1 and COM 3 use the
same
> IRQ, COM 2 and COM 4 share a second IRQ.)
Ports and IRQs ans stuff are a bit of a mystery to me, but fiddling around
in Winfax I found that it "finds" the modem on COM3 after first searching
COM1. On my PsiWin connect box, I have the "nudge" buttons set to look only
at COM1. Is there any way that I can change the IRQ settings to avoid a
conflict?
Alasdair Manson
<smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>On my machine (dual PIII-850, Win2K) it takes over 10 seconds for PsiWin to
>come back with an error message. If the error is due to a port conflict,
>there's no reason it should take this long - the call to CreateFile() within
>PsiWin should return immediately with a share violation.
without seeing the source, it's impossible to know what else PsiWin is
doing. 10 seconds does, relatively speaking, seem like a while.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Ports and IRQs ans stuff are a bit of a mystery to me, but fiddling around
indeed.
i used to manage support for Psion Inc. about 50% of our calls were PC
connectivity calls. around 75% of those were spent sorting out
miserable Windows port conflicts and other non-Psion specific
problems.
i stand by my substantive point that PsiWin gets blamed for a lot of
problems which are not at all PsiWin-specific.
see you
ali
JF Mezei
> i stand by my substantive point that PsiWin gets blamed for a lot of
> problems which are not at all PsiWin-specific.
When they wrote Psiwin 2.x, could they not predict that this would be the case ?
Why would they have the "automatic port sniffer" option instead of just
forcing the user to select a specific com port ?
Could they not have made the software to leave the com port alone until the
user specifically requested that PSIwin take over control of the port ?
And in my personal case, why would they make the software not recognize a
psion on the port with the the received data packets ? It seems that PSIwin
requires also certain modem signals otherwise it dismisses the data packets.
(PSIwin 1.x worked fine without modem signals, with just the data packets)
Since it is well known that the IBM PC serial port architecture has been
screwed from the beginning, I don't really think that is any "but we didn't
know" excuse for this.
Alasdair Manson
<jfmezei...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>When they wrote Psiwin 2.x, could they not predict that this would be the case ?
could Psion not predict 100% of all possible Windows software problems
and take account of them in the design of their software? i think
that's unrealistic.
>Why would they have the "automatic port sniffer" option instead of just
>forcing the user to select a specific com port ?
most platforms today have a port sniffer - it's quite common in the
interests of ease of users who don't know what a 'serial port' is. it
is entirely possible to tell PsiWin to only try to use one serial
port.
like most software, if said serial port is incorrectly installed,
configured or just plain not working, PsiWin is going to have a
problem.
>Could they not have made the software to leave the com port alone until the
>user specifically requested that PSIwin take over control of the port ?
actually they did. PsiWin alreadyoffers this feature.
>And in my personal case, why would they make the software not recognize a
>psion on the port with the the received data packets ? It seems that PSIwin
>requires also certain modem signals otherwise it dismisses the data packets.
>(PSIwin 1.x worked fine without modem signals, with just the data packets)
i'm not intimate enough with the communication mechanism used by
PsiWin to address this. however, if they (Psion/Symbian) had made it
less intelligent - causeing a different set if user problems - i have
no doubt that you would be criticising them for that also.
>Since it is well known that the IBM PC serial port architecture has been
>screwed from the beginning, I don't really think that is any "but we didn't
>know" excuse for this.
it's not a case of 'we didn't know' it's a case of a dated
architecture causing problems for an application?
again, do you own a car? if you have a parking space and can't use it
because somebody else is parked in it, that's your fault right?
PsiWin is far from perfect.
my point, to which i have personally witnessed a mountain of empirical
evidence in support (literally tens of thousands of first and
second-hand Support calls) is that an enormous number of problems
attributed to PsiWin are actually nothing at all to do with PsiWin. i
expect the same also applies, although i have no idea of the extent,
to other (mobile) platforms.
see you
ali
Leon
Regarding all post about whose fault it is:
Winfax is an application known to cause problems with all sorts of
other applications. It can be an administrator's nightmare.
Given the involvement of Winfax, I wouldn't be so quick to judge
PsiWin.
--Leon
RJCT
> Yes, however I'd only want to work through it if I had the PC in front of
me.
> I suggest you consult a qualified PC Maintainance Engineer (from you IS
dept,
> or a reputable computer shop.)
And could Psion Technical support not send out a pdf file with how to do
this?
RJCT
four years now, have never got it to work properly despite spending hours at
it with Psion Customer support on this NG and in other ways, and you have
the nerve to stand up and say it is not PsiWin/Symbians fault! Well-designed
software should anticipate problems and work around them, not just leave the
user in the lurch. I think that your time in Customer Support has infected
you with that Psion Tech support attitude of "blame the client", as you make
a slighlty sneering remark at my admission that I do not know much about IRQ
conflicts. If a detailed knowledge of how a PC works is required to make
PsiWin connect, then this should be written clearly on the box instead of
that absurd claim that it "integrates seamlessly" with a PC. At the very
least, instructions on how to fix this should be supplied with the product
or by technical support.
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>It is fairly incredible that you are defending PsiWIn. I have had PsiWin for
>four years now, have never got it to work properly despite spending hours at
>it with Psion Customer support on this NG and in other ways, and you have
>the nerve to stand up and say it is not PsiWin/Symbians fault!
i'm sorry but you are putting words in my mouth now.
>Well-designed
>software should anticipate problems and work around them, not just leave the
>user in the lurch. I think that your time in Customer Support has infected
>you with that Psion Tech support attitude of "blame the client", as you make
>a slighlty sneering remark at my admission that I do not know much about IRQ
>conflicts. If a detailed knowledge of how a PC works is required to make
>PsiWin connect, then this should be written clearly on the box instead of
>that absurd claim that it "integrates seamlessly" with a PC. At the very
>least, instructions on how to fix this should be supplied with the product
>or by technical support.
i'll agree to differ with you. thank you for your post.
see you
ali
John Ray
I have been using various versions for something like four years,
starting with a Psion 3c then moving on through a 5mx, Series 7 and a
Revo.
OK, there's the odd hiccup but nothing too drastic and pretty rare.
Now if you want a real nightmare try Paintshop Pro from Jasc. A great
program but it crashes on a regular basis for reasons I have yet to
work out. Indeed, I have come to the conclusion that it just doesn't
like me:-) It certainly taught me to make frequent saves of my work.
--
All the best,
John
Cathryn Johns
Just goes to prove a point - I've never had problems with Paintshop
Pro!
> --
> All the best,
> John
--
___ ___
Cathryn Johns {~._.{~._.~}
cjo...@cs.uct.ac.za ( Y )( Y )
()~*~()~*~()
"Punctuate with a Hug!" (_)-((_)-(_)
http://bounce.to/pooh
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>If a detailed knowledge of how a PC works is required to make
>PsiWin connect, then this should be written clearly on the box instead of
>that absurd claim that it "integrates seamlessly" with a PC
it's hardly absurd. there are many users, whose PCs are set up
correctly, on which PsiWin runs fine. mine is one of them.
for many, if not most, PsiWin users, no detailed PC knowledge is
required.
it's kind of like driving a car. no real knowledge of how an internal
combustion engine or a clutch works is *required* to learn to drivea
car. most people are content simply to use a car. some people educate
themselves on the workings of their cars and, thus, perhaps become
better drivers. some people learn their car inside out and this can
make car ownership, for them, a very different proposition from most
people when something goes wrong.
if you are continuing to have problems with your PC and you are not
confident that you have required knowledge to correctly diagnose and
fix the problem, i'm sure you could employ a willing technician to
sort it all out for you?
kind of like taking your car to a garage...
see you
ali
RJCT
>
> if you are continuing to have problems with your PC and you are not
> confident that you have required knowledge to correctly diagnose and
> fix the problem, i'm sure you could employ a willing technician to
> sort it all out for you?
>
A few years ago while I was still trying to get help from Psion technical
support on this problem I wrote to them and offered to fly one of their
technicians out to France at my own expense if they could fix it. But none
of them volunteered, suggesting that they don't have much faith in their own
software.
In any case, I have now worked out how to twiddle around with IRQ conflicts
and there are none. In retrospect, this is obvious because I can connect
perfectly with Winfax running BEFORE I go online. It is only after I come
off line that I can't get a connection. So clearly there are no IRQ
conflicts. The blockage is caused by some interaction between Winfax,
Dial-up networking and PsiWin.
RJCT
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:32:42 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> > I reiterate - your PC is not configured correctly. PsiWin, WinFax and
Windows
> and your PC hardware are all capable of being configured correctly. The
fault
> does not lie with any one of these things - they need to be configured to
work
> together. You need to find an engineer to set them up for you.
Thanks for your suggestion, but one thing that has occured to me is if it is
not configured correctly is how comes PsiWin works with Winfax running
BEFORE I go online? It is only after I have used DUN that it blocks. This
kind of suggests to me that the problem is not an IRQ conflict but more some
interaction between DUN, PsiWin and Winfax.
Also I tried changing all my IRQ settings in the BIOS and still had the same
problems.
I would certainly get a technician to look at it if I knew one who was
familiar with PsiWin. But I suspect I would just pay for five hours labour
with no result.
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>A few years ago while I was still trying to get help from Psion technical
>support on this problem I wrote to them and offered to fly one of their
>technicians out to France at my own expense if they could fix it. But none
>of them volunteered, suggesting that they don't have much faith in their own
>software.
that is one conclusion which one could draw. there are many others.
>In any case, I have now worked out how to twiddle around with IRQ conflicts
>and there are none.
indeed - IRQ conflicts are but one issue which affect Windows users
when it comes to serial ports. at least you have ruled out one of a
potentially long list of variables. given that 'enditall' has helped
you identify the culprit in this case (the WinFax DLL) i'm not sure
why a possible IRQ conflict made its way back on to your list of
things to check?
>In retrospect, this is obvious because I can connect
>perfectly with Winfax running BEFORE I go online. It is only after I come
>off line that I can't get a connection. So clearly there are no IRQ
>conflicts. The blockage is caused by some interaction between Winfax,
>Dial-up networking and PsiWin.
indeed - sounds very much as if WinFax is doing something to the port
which is preventing PsiWin from using it. anecdotally, i've heard many
people complain about the reliability of WinFax.
see you
ali
Craig Chambers
"Cathryn Johns" <cjo...@cs.uct.ac.za> wrote in message
news:3B29D8FB...@cs.uct.ac.za...
>
>
> John Ray wrote:
> >
> > I must say I find all this complaining about PsiWin slightly bemusing.
> Just goes to prove a point - I've never had problems with Paintshop
> Pro!
> ___ ___
> Cathryn Johns
I have to say that I have never really had problems with either PsiWin or
PSP. I couldn't connect my S5 at home once (it just wouldn't) I cured this
with a warm reset of the S5. PsiWin worked straight away when this was
done.
Having worked for the Psion Teklogix for 9 months, I have also had no
trouble maintaining backups of my old S5, three different netBooks, a
workabout, and other ER5 development machines without any technical
fiddling, using both COM1 and COM2, sniffing to see if one is connected
(switching between a machine on each COM port on many occasions). The only
trouble I have had at work were when I had left Hyperterminal or RAS access
on the COM port open and forgotten (not PsiWin's problem).
I have PsiWin 2.3.1 installed at work and am able to synchronise all of my
machines, both Agenda & Contacts (Data on the S5), with Outlook 2000.
I can understand the frustration that some people have had (just hunting
down the fact that RAS was still open took me ages) getting PsiWin to work,
but I have never experienced them.
Craig Chambers
(A personal comment from a Psion employee)
RJCT
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 14:28:33 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for your suggestion, but one thing that has occured to me is if it
is
> >not configured correctly is how comes PsiWin works with Winfax running
> >BEFORE I go online? It is only after I have used DUN that it blocks. This
> >kind of suggests to me that the problem is not an IRQ conflict but more
some
> >interaction between DUN, PsiWin and Winfax.
> >
> >Also I tried changing all my IRQ settings in the BIOS and still had the
same
> >problems.
> >
> >I would certainly get a technician to look at it if I knew one who was
> >familiar with PsiWin. But I suspect I would just pay for five hours
labour
> >with no result.
>
Well you are a Symbian employee, so given the above information, can you
suggest what I should say to a computer technician to explain the problem?
That sort of advice would be more helpful than smart-arsed quotes. I've
spent many hours trying to get PsiWin to work properly, and I don't want to
waste any more time and money unless I am guaranteed a fix. But I expect his
conclusion after a lot of expensive fiddling around is that PsiWin doesn't
work if Winfax is installed....
JF Mezei
> I don't know, I haven't asked them. But personally I wouldn't try to write
> some generic instructions on how to do this.
Yep. That's the problem. I would have saved a hell of a lot of time has PSION
(at the time) documented exactly what leads on the RS232 it was checking
before prooceeding past the initial handshake for PSIWIN 2.x
I traced the port and woudl see both the PSION and the PC's "hello I am here"
packets flow through.
I used the terminal emulator and I could see the "hello I am here" packets
coming from the PSION.
And with the PSION running COMMs, I could see the "hello I am here" packets
coming from the PC.
yet, PSIwin would refuse to see the PSION, until I started to fiddle with
modem control signals and got to the right incantation.
This is definitely something which PSION should have documented. But the
attitude described above results in users having problems that take far longer
to diagnose and solve. And had the software been written such that it wouldn't
require modem control signals, I bet you would have had a whole lot less
supporting of PSIwin to do.
It is a fact that serial ports on the wintel architecture are poorly designed.
As a result, any wintel softwarte that uses those ports should make the
minimal use of features to get the stuff working. If PSIwin 1.0 worked
without requiring a magic incantation of modem control signals, why did they
introduce them with PSIwin 2.* ?
JF Mezei
> if you are continuing to have problems with your PC and you are not
> confident that you have required knowledge to correctly diagnose and
> fix the problem, i'm sure you could employ a willing technician to
> sort it all out for you?
The technician will be at a loss because there is no technocal documentation
on what PSIwin 2.x really requires from the serial port, hence the debugging
of the port problem will be moot.
In my case, it was PSIwin software itself that was dismissing the PSION's
request to connect because I had proof that the serial port itself was fine
and data could be exchanged.
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>But I expect his conclusion after a lot of expensive fiddling
>around is that PsiWin doesn't work if Winfax is installed....
as a general statement, that's incorrect.
as a test, i just installed (the 'Typical' installation of) WinFAX Pro
9.0 on my PC and, even with the System Tray utility called Message
Manager (wfxctl32.dll) running and set to auto-receive, PsiWin
continues to connect and disconnect as elegantly as before.
after uninstalling WinFax, PsiWin contniues to connect and disconnect
as expected.
with respect, your responses to date suggest that you have made your
mind up that PsiWin is to blame. regardless.
however, there is mounting evidence and opinion that, not only is
PsiWin (indeed any serial port software) put in a difficult position
when PC serial ports are incorrectly installed or set up, or when
other PC software 'hijacks' the serial port, but that this problem is
specific to your PC and your setup.
you seemed to believe this yourself (albeit fleetingly) when you
wrote:
"I suspect that this is something to do with the TAPI thingy not
releasing the port properly for PsiWin. Mysteriously, if I uninstall
Talkworks, the problem remains, suggesting that Talkworks has done
something to my system which is not reversed by uninstallation."
and:
"I am fairly sure that it is my fax software that causes the problem"
however, your later messages suggest that you no longer accept that
your FAX software is responsible to any extent:
"Hmmm, the problem lies with PsiWin"
perhaps you have a computer-literate friend who would be willing to
spend the couple of hours it might take to ensure that all is well
with your PC with regard to your serial ports?
finally, may i offer some contructive advice?
you have, while discussing your problem, described your FAX software
as both "WinFax" and "Talkworks" which are two different products by
the same manufacturer. if you need to describe this problem in future
to a Technical Support representative (Psion or otherwise) could I
suggest that you make an *exact* note of the name of the software
product you are using as well as the version number.
this might help to ensure that somebody trying to help you doesn't
waste their time, and therefore yours, by troubleshooting a problem
with a product that you are not actually using.
i suppose it's possible that, as they are from the same manufacturer,
they use the same core technology but there is no way of knowing.
see you
ali
Martin Lowe
news:9gdc0g$8fq84$1...@ID-79483.news.dfncis.de...
> I have to say that I have never really had problems with either PsiWin or
> PSP. I couldn't connect my S5 at home once (it just wouldn't) I cured
this
> with a warm reset of the S5. PsiWin worked straight away when this was
> done.
> Having worked for the Psion Teklogix for 9 months, I have also had no
> trouble maintaining backups of my old S5, three different netBooks, a
> workabout, and other ER5 development machines without any technical
> fiddling, using both COM1 and COM2, sniffing to see if one is connected
> (switching between a machine on each COM port on many occasions). The
only
> trouble I have had at work were when I had left Hyperterminal or RAS
access
> on the COM port open and forgotten (not PsiWin's problem).
> I have PsiWin 2.3.1 installed at work and am able to synchronise all of my
> machines, both Agenda & Contacts (Data on the S5), with Outlook 2000.
> I can understand the frustration that some people have had (just hunting
> down the fact that RAS was still open took me ages) getting PsiWin to
work,
> but I have never experienced them.
Well, I suppose some would argue that working for Psion means that you
aren't going to have any problems!
But I'd like to add that I've never had any problems with PsiWin I haven't
been able to figure out for myself, and I'm no techie guru.
In fact, for a long time I have been successfully able to use my Revo+ as
the bridge between my home PC with Lotus Organizer 5.0 and Eudora 5 using
the cradle, and my work laptop with Outlook 2000 (apparently "unsupported")
with IrDa.
--
Martin
Fred Wiersma
<3B2A5260...@videotron.ca>:
<cut>
>yet, PSIwin would refuse to see the PSION, until I started to fiddle
>with modem control signals and got to the right incantation.
>
<cut>
JF,
Could you give some more info on the modem control settings you refer to?
Even with enditall killing all unnecessary apps, PsiWin does not recognize
my machine. With Comms & Hyperterm on the PC I can transfer files though...
Thanks in advance,
Fred Wiersma
David CL Francis
>Yes it is Winfax. But I don't absolve PsiWIn of blame. Do they expect us to
>buy a PC dedicated to backing up the Psion? Symbian should design around
>software conflicts. Winfax is hardly an obscure piece of software after all.
Is that practical? If a valid program grabs a comm port and does not let
go should another program be allowed to disconnect it? I would have
thought not. What Psiwin should no is to say (and I have seen this
message), 'Com1 in use by another program' or something like that.
--
David CL Francis E-Mail reply to <ot...@dclf.demon.co.uk>
Alasdair Manson
<ot...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Is that practical? If a valid program grabs a comm port and does not let
>go should another program be allowed to disconnect it?
absolutely not.
however, i don't think anybody is suggesting that PsiWin should
summarily terminate another application in this manner - or are they?
>I would have thought not.
i agree with you david.
>What Psiwin should no is to say (and I have seen this
>message), 'Com1 in use by another program' or something like that.
which is exactly what it does - PsiWin actually goes *way* beyond that
in terms of help
first PsiWin tells you this:
"A connection could not be formed between your PC and Psion. Please
check that the Psion and PC are connected, that the Psion is switched
on and that the communications link on the Psion is switched on."
which is, i presume, designed to weed out the absolutely obvious
problems which are so often easily overlooked.
in that dialog, clicking on <Help> produces the following rather
helpful list:
"Check that you are using a Psion that PsiWin can recognize.
Check that the Psion is ready to connect.
Make sure the Psion and PC can communicate at the same speed
Check that the Psion has enough free memory to connect.
Close down programs on the Psion that may be using the Psion serial
port.
Stop PsiWin searching COM ports used by other devices.
Make sure that the COM port you are using is not 'linked' to one in
use by another device.
Reset the Psion serial port."
Navigating further into the help produces the following:
"Stop PsiWin searching COM ports used by other devices
It may not be possible for PsiWin to connect because another device on
the PC is using the COM port. This may happen if you have certain
modems or a serial mouse attached to your PC, and also if your PC has
internal devices which can access the COM port (e.g. an internal
modem). It is therefore a good idea to tell PsiWin to ignore some
ports, so that conflicts with other devices do not occur. How?
~~~
Make sure that the COM port you are using is not 'linked' to one in
use by another device
If you have a Fax/Modem using COM 2 or 4 and the PsiWin cable
connected to COM 1 or 2 (or vice versa) you may experience some
difficulty when trying to connect with the Psion.
This is because of the way the PC handles COM ports: COM 1 and 3 are
linked as are COM 2 and 4. Specifically, they share the same Interrupt
Request. In practice, this means that if you have a modem on COM3 it
may conflict with the Psion on COM1 (and the same applies for COM4 and
COM2). Use the Psion on a different port."
i'd have to say that, to any reasonable observer, that's some pretty
helpful help.
compare and contrast with the error that you get when the shoe is on
the other foot between HyperTerminal and PsiWin... Hyper terminal
gives you this (and nothing else):
"Unable to open COM1"
i searched the HyperTerminal online help for "error", "unable",
"open", "com1" and came up completely blank.
i'm sorry but i feel that some people just have a real bee in their
bonnet and, because they are having problems with their PC setup,
PsiWin is used as a convenient scapegoat for non PsiWin-related
problems.
i believe the problem is compounded by the poor support available on
the subject of serial ports, etc. from Microsoft and PC hardware
vendors - sadly, customers in those cases often end up as a tennis
ball in a game of 'Support Tennis' - bounced back and forth between MS
and PC vendor, each claiming that it's the other's fault. i've worked
in support and i know how immensely frustrating it can be.
before i get flamed, i believe that PsiWin is far from perfect and
that Psion has been slow and uncommunicative with users regarding
improvements.
my point is a simple one - there are many problems for which PsiWin
is, demonstrably, blamed which are not PsiWin-specific.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>But I expect his conclusion after a lot of expensive fiddling around
>is that PsiWin doesn't work if Winfax is installed....
if you are actually using Talkworks rather than WinFax, note the
following:
http://www.symantec.com/talkworks/
pretty pathetic of Symantec?
i know two wrongs don't make a right. this is context.
see you
ali
RJCT
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:10:21 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >But I expect his conclusion after a lot of expensive fiddling
> >around is that PsiWin doesn't work if Winfax is installed....
>
> as a general statement, that's incorrect.
>
> as a test, i just installed (the 'Typical' installation of) WinFAX Pro
> 9.0 on my PC and, even with the System Tray utility called Message
> Manager (wfxctl32.dll) running and set to auto-receive, PsiWin
> continues to connect and disconnect as elegantly as before.
Did you try going on line? Mine connects and disconnects quite happily until
I go online and then after coming offline again it no longer works.
>
> after uninstalling WinFax, PsiWin contniues to connect and disconnect
> as expected.
>
> with respect, your responses to date suggest that you have made your
> mind up that PsiWin is to blame. regardless.
Well my Winfax software works perfectly all the time, never gives me any
problems under any circumstances. PsiWin is an unpredictable nightmare with
constant blockages, hanging "Todo" lists, doubled contact entries, etc.
Which one would you conclude is the more stable piece of software?
>
> however, there is mounting evidence and opinion that, not only is
> PsiWin (indeed any serial port software) put in a difficult position
> when PC serial ports are incorrectly installed or set up, or when
> other PC software 'hijacks' the serial port, but that this problem is
> specific to your PC and your setup.
>
I've had the same problem on two PCs.
> you seemed to believe this yourself (albeit fleetingly) when you
> wrote:
>
> "I suspect that this is something to do with the TAPI thingy not
> releasing the port properly for PsiWin. Mysteriously, if I uninstall
> Talkworks, the problem remains, suggesting that Talkworks has done
> something to my system which is not reversed by uninstallation."
>
> and:
>
> "I am fairly sure that it is my fax software that causes the problem"
>
> however, your later messages suggest that you no longer accept that
> your FAX software is responsible to any extent:
>
> "Hmmm, the problem lies with PsiWin"
I couldn't really care less about your trivial argument about whether one
software or another is "to blame". The point is that PsiWin does not work
properly on my PC.
I know from this NG that I am not the only person who has problems with it
either.
>
>
> perhaps you have a computer-literate friend who would be willing to
> spend the couple of hours it might take to ensure that all is well
> with your PC with regard to your serial ports?
As I have said I have been through my BIOS settings and ensured that there
are no IRQ conflicts. Moreover, if it is an IRQ conflict how comes PsiWin
works fine with Winfax installed until I go online?
>
> finally, may i offer some contructive advice?
>
> you have, while discussing your problem, described your FAX software
> as both "WinFax" and "Talkworks" which are two different products by
> the same manufacturer.
Talkworks is just Winfax with a few extras. I tried installing Winfax10, but
got the same result.
RJCT
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:10:21 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> >But I expect his conclusion after a lot of expensive fiddling around
> >is that PsiWin doesn't work if Winfax is installed....
>
> if you are actually using Talkworks rather than WinFax, note the
> following:
>
> http://www.symantec.com/talkworks/
>
> pretty pathetic of Symantec?
>
problem with it.
David CL Francis
<jej...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
neither does Psiwin.
Now Netscape 6 and Real Player - well they often crash!
And yet some programs give trouble for months and then get better.
Others do the reverse. The sheer complexity of each separate computer
set up is possibly to blame?
JF Mezei
> Could you give some more info on the modem control settings you refer to?
> Even with enditall killing all unnecessary apps, PsiWin does not recognize
> my machine. With Comms & Hyperterm on the PC I can transfer files though...
I don't recall. I gave up on the PSION 5 long ago. It is just used as a fancy
desktop calendar, and I use it to connect to internet during power failures.
However, if you use google, you might fid it. I suspect posts in 1998 (or
perhaps 1997). Look for PSIWIN and Macintosh and Softwindows.
williamson
take some blame because my pc is full of crap I don't need, However, one
thing that is a pain is the fact I can't connect to psiwin when I'm online.
Is this due to me 'sharing' a port?
--
Cheers
Robert
(Remove SPAMTRAP to reply.)
Alasdair Manson <ali_m...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b2a82bd...@news.pacbell.net...
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
<jfmezei...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>Why would they have the "automatic port sniffer" option instead of just
>forcing the user to select a specific com port ?
Given many new users haven't got a clue what a serial port is, I
don't see that PsiWin could reasonably have forced them to select
a port manually. Luckily you can also select a port manually,
which does help for some PCs.
>Could they not have made the software to leave the com port alone until the
>user specifically requested that PSIwin take over control of the port ?
PsiWin doesn't touch the port until you invoke it.
>And in my personal case, why would they make the software not recognize a
>psion on the port with the the received data packets ? It seems that PSIwin
>requires also certain modem signals otherwise it dismisses the data packets.
>(PSIwin 1.x worked fine without modem signals, with just the data packets)
Given that the PsiWin cable includes the normal RS232 hardware
flow control signals, I'm not surprised that these are used.
There can be complications in using in band signalling (Xon Xoff)
especially if you are transferring binary data.
>Since it is well known that the IBM PC serial port architecture has been
>screwed from the beginning,
I don't actually thin the PC serial port architecture is all that
screwed up really. Many of the "port" problems come from trying
to use more ports than are available in a machine that has only a
limited number of interrupts to share between ports. A PC only
has provision for two serial ports (indeed, some versions of
Windows didn't support more than that). If a mouse takes one,
and a modem takes another, you obviously have potential for
problems when you connect yet another gadget.
You probably know by now that you can reduce a lot of the
problems people encounter by say moving their mouse to a PS2 port
to free up a serial port, ensuring that there are no Com 3 or Com
4 ports in use, and by not installing every piece of software
that has ever hit the internet.
I have NEVER failed to get PsiWin working on any PC that had a
spare serial port, and on which I could start with a clean hard
drive, and I've installed it on a fair few models.
--
Eric Lindsay http://psiphi.server101.com/airlie
Airlie Beach Qld Australia - Great Barrier Reef entry
Psion & Epoc site http://psiphi.server101.com/epoc
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
Ray) wrote:
>OK, there's the odd hiccup but nothing too drastic and pretty rare.
>
>Now if you want a real nightmare try Paintshop Pro from Jasc. A great
>program but it crashes on a regular basis for reasons I have yet to
>work out.
Yes indeed, I've found Paintshop Pro very unstable, and indeed
didn't load it on this PC since I'd done the work I needed with
it. By comparison, PsiWin has been essentially trouble free and
very reliable for years (for me). I used to change PCs at work
very frequently, and installed PsiWin on all of them without
trouble as part of my tests of whether they were suitable for us.
Also didn't have any problems with multiple Psion machines being
used. PsiWin identified them just fine and stored backups in
different areas without problems.
The only fault that ever took me some time to diagnose was when
my oldest PsiWin cable went unreliable (not broken but just
unreliable). I think I spent a fair bit of an afternoon before I
tracked that down. Replacement cable fixed it.
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
wrote:
>And could Psion Technical support not send out a pdf file with how to do
>this?
I don't believe so, because you can't be sure what is already
configured, and what it changed.
If you have a PC that includes serial ports, I bet this process
works (but you wouldn't want to get a support file saying to do
it, would you?)
Connect a PS2 mouse to the PS2 port. If you have an external
modem, connect it to one of the serial ports. Do not connect
anything else to the remaining serial port. The only card in
your PC should be your video card.
Go to the CMOS and accept the defaults for everything.
Install a blank formatted hard drive. Install Windows 9x and
accept all the defaults but not any fax software or any sound
player. Install MS Office if you own it.
Install PsiWin (any version from 2.1 up).
I bet that will work. Then as you add things, you may eventually
break PsiWin. It depends on the things you add, and to some
extent the order in which you add them.
Sitting Bull
I use a 3mx, and a Win2000-desktop. On the Win2000 I have several
devices (via switch-box) all using the same Com-port. I also use
WinFaxPro-Client in Client-Server-configuration.
When switching between com-devices, I take care to free up de port. As
long that I do that, no problem with com-port-usage. One of the
devices is a CE-machine, and It should be said, the ActiveSync is much
more user-friendly and stable (when the CE-machine is removed from the
craddle, it even asks kindly if the com-port should be freed)
With WinFax I have a lot of client-server and data-base problems
(unsolvable by symantec, nor the optimize and rebuild tools).
PsiWin gives sometimes problems when I drag-and-drop files from the
one machine to the other. A first drag-and-drop works fine, a second
drag-and-drop (immedeatly after the first) doesn't work. I found out
that killing the PSCONV.DLL task in Windows sometimes solves the
problem without reboot. I have the impression that the PsiWin-option
"Allow Series-3 to see Pc-Files" is involved.
Interesting : I use PsiWin 2.3 on Win2000 (normally this should not
work ?) Some time ago I uninstalled 2.3, installed 2.3.2 +
Win2000-patch, and NOTHING worked anymore. Uninstalled 2.3.2 and
reinstalled 2.3 : everything back to normal. I did this several times
with same results. Who understands ?
Since I moved to Win2000, the connectivity-problems are 10% of what I
encountered with WIN98 and WIN95.
My major problem is not being able anymore to Print-Via-Pc as since
PsiWin 2.2 the PSIPRINT.DYL isn't included anymore in the
PsiWin-distribution, and the PsiWin2.1 version isn't compatible.
In general I think that especially the Windows-environment should be
blamed for the connectivity problems. First-time-works
second-time-no-work problems are encountered with the
Client-Server-Winfax, the HP-deskscan-II-software, banking-software
and PsiWin. However there it seems there is no relation between them.
So far my PsiWin-considerations.
Kind regards
SB
Alasdair Manson
<willi...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>I've had quite a good time with psiwin although it is a bit fussy. I must
>take some blame because my pc is full of crap I don't need, However, one
>thing that is a pain is the fact I can't connect to psiwin when I'm online.
>Is this due to me 'sharing' a port?
if you can't use two serial evices simultaneously, that almost certain
indicates some kind of port conflict (normally COM1 and COM3 or COM2
and COM4). with a little help from somebody PC-literate, you should be
able to sort this out.
see you
ali
williamson
>with a little help from somebody PC-literate, you should be
> able to sort this out.
Should I be insulted? ;-)
Cathryn Johns
I've used PsiWin on win95 (with a modem installed on the same COM port
- I unplug it and plug in the revo when I need to use it) with
absolutely no problems.
I've used it on a Win2000 machine at work, with no other serial
devices - I struggled to get it to work, eventually I connected via
hyperterminal, checked the port settings, and used those. It worked
fine for a while, then wouldn't connect any more. But it would
connect via hyperterminal, and eventually I figured out that if I
connected via hyperterminal *first*, then it would connect via PsiWin
with no problems.
Then, with absolutely nothing changing inbetween, this wouldn't work
either. Now it won't connect via PsiWin no matter what I do (even
though it still connects via Hyperterminal). So I downloaded the new
Win2000 Psiwin - didn't work. Downloaded the patch - didn't work.
Still doesn't work. Installed the non-w2k Psiwin on a win98 machine -
works perfectly every time.
So whether the problem is with Psiwin or Windows, I don't know - more
likely the combination. But what I find odd is that it *did* work,
and then it just wouldn't.
--
___ ___
Cathryn Johns {~._.{~._.~}
cjo...@cs.uct.ac.za ( Y )( Y )
()~*~()~*~()
"Punctuate with a Hug!" (_)-((_)-(_)
http://bounce.to/pooh
RJCT
>
>
> So whether the problem is with Psiwin or Windows, I don't know - more
> likely the combination. But what I find odd is that it *did* work,
> and then it just wouldn't.
>
This is one of the bizarre features of PsiWin that I have noticed too.
Everything seems fine for a while, then without changing anything something
stops working. Mine has now gone into the mode where whenever I want to
transfer a file between machines, it won't start until I break the
connection and reconnect, then it suddenly announces "x items waiting in
queue" and starts transferring. It is really weird because this worked fine
before (where "fine" is a relative term, compared to all the other
connection problems I have). Another recently arisen problem is that again
without changing anything Todo/Task synchro hangs. I have found a work
around for that by setting up a Synch profile just for Task/Todos and
leaving the other options unchecked. That seems to work, though if I try
checking the others it hangs...
Hognoxious
<9gaqpd$abo$1...@wanadoo.fr> RJCT issued this pearl of wisdom:>news:3b28dca1....@news.pacbell.net...
>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:08:25 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> confirms, in my mind, that PsiWin gets a lot of criticism here for
>> "just not working" when some other piece of software is causing a
>> clash.
>>
>Yes it is Winfax. But I don't absolve PsiWIn of blame. Do they expect us to
>buy a PC dedicated to backing up the Psion? Symbian should design around
>software conflicts. Winfax is hardly an obscure piece of software after all.
>
express is open. Now these must be, rightly or wrongly, the most common email
clients on these platforms. What adds insult to injury is that it doesn't tell
you it can't connect - the wiggly caterpillar in the taskbar tray tells you
it's connected, when in fact it isn't.
Presumably someone thought that checking a return code was beneath their
dignity.
--
Quis spamondanet ipsos spamondanent?
Hognoxious
<3b29112a....@news.pacbell.net> Alasdair Manson issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:25:36 -0400, "Mike Smith"
><smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>
>>There's no excuse, IMO, for PsiWin just going out to lunch
>>...
>>it should just come out and *say* so.
>
>PsiWin doesn't "go out to lunch" - it is just unable to make a
>connection and it tells the user exactly that.
On 2 out of 2 win95 machines and a 1 out of 1 win98 ones I've used it on it the
connection server does precisely that.
It will sit there for hours, apparently connected but if you click the wiggly
worm/sine wave icon and look at properties it says "Connected to a
connecting...".
Going through the "my Psion" icon, the popup with the headbutting cables appears
and eventually it reports that it cannot connect.
If Psion can get it half right once, they could get it half right twice.
How can it be windows' fault when one Psion program can detect the error and
another one can't?
Hognoxious
<3b291194....@news.pacbell.net> Alasdair Manson issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:31:42 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Stupid analogy. PsiWin doesn't "own" the serial port.
>
>with respect, just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it
>stupid.
Al, I totally agree. Your post was not stupid because RJCT doesn't agree; it
was stupid on its own merits.
Hognoxious
<3b294d81....@news.pacbell.net> Alasdair Manson issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 21:16:45 +0200, "RJCT" <rj...@xxxbigfoot.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Ports and IRQs ans stuff are a bit of a mystery to me, but fiddling around
>
>indeed.
>
>i used to manage support for Psion Inc.
!
>i stand by my substantive point that PsiWin gets blamed for a lot of
>problems which are not at all PsiWin-specific.
If it was Windows' fault, then surely other software e.g. the Palm equivalent
would seem to have the same problem. But Palm's synchronisation seems to get
nothing but praise.
Never thought I'd find myself (almost) defending M$.
Mike Smith
news:3b2abebd...@news.whitsunday.net.au...
>
> I have NEVER failed to get PsiWin working on any PC that had a
> spare serial port, and on which I could start with a clean hard
> drive
Oh, yeah. Now *that's* realistic. "Sure, you can make PsiWin work, you
just have to shoot your system in the head first."
--
Mike Smith
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>If Psion can get it half right once, they could get it half right twice.
>How can it be windows' fault when one Psion program can detect the error and
>another one can't?
there could be any number of explanations for this but i'm not
intimate with windows and PsiWin at a low enough level to know the
answer.
perhaps the windows API is giving PsiWin different information in the
case of these two connections and PsiWin is trying to react to that
feedback in different ways? as i say, i don't know.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Al, I totally agree. Your post was not stupid because RJCT doesn't agree; it
>was stupid on its own merits.
yawn...
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>If it was Windows' fault, then surely other software e.g. the Palm equivalent
>would seem to have the same problem.
that's such a massive oversimplification as to be worthless, in my
opinion.
>But Palm's synchronisation seems to get nothing but praise.
in which case, in my opinion, you have your head firmly planted in the
sand.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Presumably someone thought that checking a return code was beneath their
>dignity.
have you sen the sources? how do you know this problem is caused by
somebody failing to check a return code?
(poor quality) sarcasm simply devalues your contribution moreso, for
what it's worth. just my opinion, of course.
see you
ali
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>This is one of the bizarre features of PsiWin that I have noticed too.
>Everything seems fine for a while, then without changing anything something
>stops working.
in my experience, this feature is not limited to PsiWin. i have
experienced the same with Windows features themselves and with other
Windows applications. in my opinion, this is not a PsiWin-specific
problem.
see you
ali
JF Mezei
> >If it was Windows' fault, then surely other software e.g. the Palm equivalent
> >would seem to have the same problem.
>
> that's such a massive oversimplification as to be worthless, in my
> opinion.
Mr Manson,
If other software which makes use of the communications port is able to
succesfully function, and if Hyperterminal is succesfully capable of
communicating to the PSION's comms application, and if Hyperterminal on the PC
is able to see the "hello I am here" packets from the PSION when the later's
link is set to ON, BUT psiwin does not wish to establish the connection, don't
you think that it is fair to highly suspect PSIwin ?
If other applications are able to establish connections to their peer device
at the other end, shouldn't PSIwin be able to ?
And I ask you, with the series 3 software on PCs, were problems with lack of
establishement of connection the same or worse ?
I can tell you this:
With PSIwin 1.x, I was able to establish connection to a series 3c from the
first attempt. With PSIwin 2.x, it fails to establish connection to either a
3c or 5 (although it did succeed for a while). Same cabling as with PSI 1.x
If PSIwin 1.x is able to establish connection, but PSIwin 2.x isn't, isn't it
fair to blame PSIwin 2.x ?
And in my experience of supporting (by telephone) a telecom application on
windows, to solve comms problems, you would use hyperterminal and try the
various permutations to figure out what port and what settings would work to
talk to the modem. Once that was done, the application could be configured and
you knew it would work.
But with PSIwin, even when you narrow down the selection of ports and speeds
to a port that is known to work, it still fails to negotiate and gives the
same stupid meaningless "couldn't connect" message.
Alasdair Manson
<jfmezei...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>Mr Manson,
Mr. Mezei
>If other software which makes use of the communications port is able to
>succesfully function, and if Hyperterminal is succesfully capable of
>communicating to the PSION's comms application, and if Hyperterminal on the PC
>is able to see the "hello I am here" packets from the PSION when the later's
>link is set to ON, BUT psiwin does not wish to establish the connection, don't
>you think that it is fair to highly suspect PSIwin ?
i worked in Support long enough to know that there are many variables
which can create a misleading environment. i don't think the
hypothetical situation you've described is the issue with which RJCT
has a problem.
>If other applications are able to establish connections to their peer device
>at the other end, shouldn't PSIwin be able to ?
that's certainly more likely but, i'm not aware that RJCT has "other
applications" or another "peer device".
>And I ask you, with the series 3 software on PCs, were problems with lack of
>establishement of connection the same or worse ?
PC connectivit was, in my opinion, always an undue burden on support.
the common factor, in all cases: Windows.
>With PSIwin 1.x, I was able to establish connection to a series 3c from the
>first attempt. With PSIwin 2.x, it fails to establish connection to either a
>3c or 5 (although it did succeed for a while). Same cabling as with PSI 1.x
>
>If PSIwin 1.x is able to establish connection, but PSIwin 2.x isn't, isn't it
>fair to blame PSIwin 2.x ?
all else being equal, that's more likely. however, as i've said,
things seem to 'just break' in Windows when apprently nothing else has
changed.
>But with PSIwin, even when you narrow down the selection of ports and speeds
>to a port that is known to work, it still fails to negotiate and gives the
>same stupid meaningless "couldn't connect" message.
i don't think that "couldn't connect" is either stupid or meaningless.
thank you for your post.
see you
ali
RJCT
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 17:19:30 GMT, Hognoxious <nos...@newsranger.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If Psion can get it half right once, they could get it half right twice.
> >How can it be windows' fault when one Psion program can detect the error
and
> >another one can't?
>
> there could be any number of explanations for this but i'm not
> intimate with windows and PsiWin at a low enough level to know the
> answer.
Indeed. ;-)
RJCT
> i worked in Support long enough to know that there are many variables
> which can create a misleading environment. i don't think the
> hypothetical situation you've described is the issue with which RJCT
> has a problem.
>
I have been following JF Mezei's posts and I suspect that my problems are
indeed due to the inadequacies he describes, simply because of the
inconsistency of connection problems. It is most peculiar how sometimes it
works and sometimes it doesn't, and the sheer variety of different
connection issues that it throws up. The latest incarnation is that even on
a fresh boot and without going on line, pressing the synch button in
"Outlook" just locks up. Yet it works if I press the sych button in the
Start menu. Those sort of inconsistency problems are suggestive of bad
software design.
JF Mezei
> connection issues that it throws up. The latest incarnation is that even on
> a fresh boot and without going on line, pressing the synch button in
> "Outlook" just locks up. Yet it works if I press the sych button in the
> Start menu. Those sort of inconsistency problems are suggestive of bad
> software design.
If PSIwin had more detailed information on its status/progress and reasons for
not establishing (or breaking) connectsions (as I described in an earlier
post), then users would be able to report to PSION much better information in
why PSIwin fails and PSION would then have an opportunity to change the
progranm to be more tolerant of variations in hardware, windows problems etc.
But for as long as the only information one gets is "Sorry, can't establish
connection", then one can only report to PSION "sorry, your bloody software
won't connect".
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Those sort of inconsistency problems are suggestive of bad
>software design.
you certainly would not be the first person to describe MS in those
terms 8-)
see you
ali
Tim Giles
Actually, it sometimes doesn't work even then. I've tried PsiWin 2.1 and
2.2, on two different machines, under Win95 and WinNT (all 8
combinations). Fresh OS installation, no other software on hard disk, no
IRQ conflicts, no other devices using serial ports, no hardware problems
with the serial port. No connection to Psion.
Anyone else had worse luck? :-)
Tim
John E. Ballard
I had exactly the same 'fun' I however contacted (by e-mail) the
technical guy's at Psion. I was told that a registry hack was required
to get W2000 talking via PsiWin 2.32 to a S3.
Try the following (carefully....)
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Psion\TASKSCHEDULER
"EC_Extra"=dword:000036DD
If your of a nervous disposition rename this TXT file to Series3.REG,
right click it in Windows Explorer and choose 'Merge'
Set the baud rate at both ends to be 57600 (also try lower speeds if that
fails), just
have the correct COM port ticked (ie don't let the software search for the
Psion)
Now, to be honest I've heard people say this didn't work, but it's been fine
for me.
Regards,
John
"Alasdair Manson" <ali_m...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b294d01....@news.pacbell.net...
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 17:14:42 -0400, "Mike Smith"
> <smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>
> >On my machine (dual PIII-850, Win2K) it takes over 10 seconds for PsiWin
to
> >come back with an error message. If the error is due to a port conflict,
> >there's no reason it should take this long - the call to CreateFile()
within
> >PsiWin should return immediately with a share violation.
>
> without seeing the source, it's impossible to know what else PsiWin is
> doing. 10 seconds does, relatively speaking, seem like a while.
>
> see you
>
> ali
Stuart Moore
Would you agree it is unhelpful (or at least isn't as much help as it could be)?
Personally, I'd be glad of any additional explanation of what's gone wrong, as
it gives me a far higher chance of fixing it than having to guess. It's
something that shouldn't be too awkward to implement into the existing code and
would help a lot of people a lot of the time. Seems reasonable.
Stuart
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>Would you agree it is unhelpful (or at least isn't as much help as it could be)?
i would agree that it could be more helpful.
i think some people here are forgetting that this is simply an error
message - sometimes an error message should be brief and to the point
and then offer the user a pointer to additional help they need. that's
exactly what PsiWin does.
>Personally, I'd be glad of any additional explanation of what's gone wrong, as
>it gives me a far higher chance of fixing it than having to guess. It's
>something that shouldn't be too awkward to implement into the existing code and
>would help a lot of people a lot of the time. Seems reasonable.
there is a great deal of help available in the online help as i have
indicated elsewhere in this thread.
see you
ali
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
<smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>> I have NEVER failed to get PsiWin working on any PC that had a
>> spare serial port, and on which I could start with a clean hard
>> drive
>Oh, yeah. Now *that's* realistic. "Sure, you can make PsiWin work, you
>just have to shoot your system in the head first."
Considering the legendary reliability and stability of Windows,
reinstalling everything every six months seems to me to fall
under the heading of normal system maintenance. It is neither my
fault, nor Psion's fault, that Windows 9x is an inherently
unreliable system. And as long as anything installing new
programs can fiddle with the dlls and the registry it will stay
unreliable, and there is nothing that PsiWin can be do about it.
The method I specified will get PsiWin installed and working. I'm
not wasting my time attempting to determine exactly which
conflicting Windows dll combination will cause it to break. I
assume you can still get registry monitors and dll checkers, so
if you want to find causes, go for it. Lots of people will thank
you.
If you want a reliable system that you don't have to shoot in the
head a couple of times a year, try Solaris or BSD.
--
Eric Lindsay http://psiphi.server101.com/airlie
Airlie Beach Qld Australia - Great Barrier Reef entry
Psion & Epoc site http://psiphi.server101.com/epoc
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
<nos...@newsranger.com> wrote:
>If it was Windows' fault, then surely other software e.g. the Palm equivalent
>would seem to have the same problem. But Palm's synchronisation seems to get
>nothing but praise.
The Palm conduits don't try to do the same thing as PsiWin. Have
a play with them and check that they take a much simpler approach
(and I suspect Psion probably wish they hadn't tried to be as
ambitious). I don't own a Palm, but based on helping a Palm and
Visor owner, I believe that the Palm reduces its port handshake
to a single line, and the Visor eliminates it altogether, and
this may help with running the port. The syncing seems to be
confined to a single product at a time, not with something doing
multiple products. The syncing also appears to be at an entire
record level, and not at a field level as seems to happen with
PsiWin conversions. There doesn't seem to be any cut and paste
conversions. But I haven't researched the matter. It just
looked simpler when I was helping solve a problem with it.
I've seen complaints in Palm groups about syncing. It isn't all
praise, although it certainly gets fewer complaints.
Stuart Moore
There is a great deal of static help - i.e. help that's displayed whatever the
situation. This is good, but I'd like extra info on the specific problem at that
time - something as simple as a "Details" button, as they have on Dial Up
Networking when it cannot connect, giving more info for those who can use it
Stuart
Hognoxious
<3b2e5645...@news.pacbell.net> Alasdair Manson issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 16:49:32 GMT, Hognoxious <nos...@newsranger.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Presumably someone thought that checking a return code was beneath their
>>dignity.
I would say that it's a pretty common cause of symptoms where something went
wrong, but the app thinks it worked.
>have you sen the sources? how do you know this problem is caused by
>somebody failing to check a return code?
Get a dictionary, and look up 'presumably'. When *I* post conjecture, I say so.
As to the source, that raises another point; maybe Psion should just publish it
and unleash the power of a thousand eyeballs.
>(poor quality) sarcasm simply devalues your contribution moreso, for
>what it's worth. just my opinion, of course.
This from the man who posted 'Yawn' as a reply. Hardly the level of Oscar
Wilde, is it?
RJCT
for putting in a synch button that does not work.
Eric Lindsay's spam trap
Giles) wrote:
>Actually, it sometimes doesn't work even then. I've tried PsiWin 2.1 and
>2.2, on two different machines, under Win95 and WinNT (all 8
>combinations). Fresh OS installation, no other software on hard disk, no
>IRQ conflicts, no other devices using serial ports, no hardware problems
>with the serial port. No connection to Psion.
>
>Anyone else had worse luck? :-)
Did you also manage to check for a connection using Comms and
HyperTerm?
Which model Psion were you using?
Under the circumstances you describe I'd be suspicious of a fault
with the serial cable, and would put a serial line monitor on the
cable connection to see if something seemed funny with the cable.
I've had PsiWin fail with a faulty cable, with the connector at
the Psion end not making proper contact. It gave intermittent
faults, and was hard to track down.
Rolf Brunsting
<< On 2 out of 2 win95 machines and a 1 out of 1 win98 ones I've used
it on it the connection server does precisely that ... >>
I can't come up with such '2 out of 2' figures as I've lost count of
the number of machines I've installed and used PsiWin on. Getting the
PC to connect with the Psion has never been a problem. A question of
investigating the PC's configuration and setting the thing up the right
way.
<< How can it be windows' fault when one Psion program can detect the
error and another one can't? >>
In many cases it's the user who doesn't really know the configuration
of the hardware resources and which applications are using them. Thus
creating conflicts the user isn't aware of. Which isn't that strange as
data communication is a black art to many PC users.
--
Kind Regards,
Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands
Rolf Brunsting
<< Personally, I'd be glad of any additional explanation of what's gone
wrong, as it gives me a far higher chance of fixing it than having to
guess >>
You'd need to know how PsiWin works in order to interpret the messages
PsiWin could give to describe what's going wrong. That's the problem
with detailed error messages as you'll have to know what the message
means.
Rolf Brunsting
<< If other software which makes use of the communications port is able
to succesfully function .... >>
In the hypothetical situation you're describing it's right to
investigate the performance of PsiWin. Whether PsiWin's really the
culprit can't be established on the basis of your description.
<< If other applications are able to establish connections to their
peer device at the other end, shouldn't PSIwin be able to ? >>
PsiWin is certainly able to. Thing is that using a combination of
applications can create problems the user isn't aware of.
<< And I ask you, with the series 3 software on PCs, were problems with
lack of establishement of connection the same or worse ? >>
Roughly the same situation as you can have similar problems with RCom
as with PsiWin 1.x and 2.x. What's happened during the years is that
the number of (internal or external) devices people use with their PC
has increased. It's logical that the number of hardware/software
configuration problems has increased wih it. The more devices the
higher the risk of hardware/software conficts the average PC user isn't
equipped to solve.
Rolf Brunsting
<< If it was Windows' fault, then surely other software e.g. the Palm
equivalent would seem to have the same problem >>
And they have the same problems. I've had to assist a number of people
who used our telemetry software as well as Palm's Desktop on laptops.
The Palm connection server coming into conflict with our DD4W
communication kernel (or vice versa).
<< But Palm's synchronisation seems to get nothing but praise >>
Palm users who tend not to have problems are those synchronising with
the Palm Desktop. Synchronising with third-party applications, like
Microsoft Outlook, can be problematic some times. Resulting in the same
duplication of entries as can happen with PsiWin.
Stuart Moore
news:9gr9tq$8nkmf$4...@reader02.wxs.nl...
> Stuart,
>
> << Personally, I'd be glad of any additional explanation of what's gone
> wrong, as it gives me a far higher chance of fixing it than having to
> guess >>
>
> You'd need to know how PsiWin works in order to interpret the messages
> PsiWin could give to describe what's going wrong. That's the problem
> with detailed error messages as you'll have to know what the message
> means.
>
You don't need to know Psiwin in intimate detail - for example, if the messages
were:
- Nothing was recieved on com port x
- yyy was received on com port x. This was not interpreted as a valid response.
- Speeds a,b,c and d were tried unsuccessfully
it's a bit more helpful and might give you a clue as to what to look at. It's
also something more definite to hand to tech support, and could also lead to an
(unofficial) faq dealing with common solutions to these problems.
As I said, a "details" box which could give this information could be v. helpful
without a newbie expecting they'd be able to understand it.
Stuart
Tim Giles
>Did you also manage to check for a connection using Comms and
>HyperTerm?
Sure - IIRC one of the terminal programs out there even checks the
handshaking signals. Both PCs were subsequently converted to running
Linux, and both PCs communicate perfectly with my Psion via. Matt
Gumbley's excellent plptools.
>Which model Psion were you using?
A vanilla 5 with rom 1.01.
Now that I have incremental backup scripts running under Linux, and Andrew
Johnson's postscript printer drivers on the Psion, I have little need for
PsiWin. But it would have been nice if PsiWin had worked.
Tim
Hognoxious
<9gr9tf$8nkmf$1...@reader02.wxs.nl> Rolf Brunsting issued this pearl of wisdom:
If it was windows' fault, both Psion apps would behave the same.
As a test I also installed (on a win98 machine) the software that came with my
DC120 camera. It uses a serial cable, on the same COM port, at the same speed
as PsiWin. It connects perfectly (even when outlook is open, which I find
always blocks PsiWin), and if it can't connect (for example the psion connection
manager is open[1]) it says so and suggests to check the camera is on,
connected, and that nothing else is using the port.
If it was a windows problem, then the Kodak app wouldn't work either.
[1] even if it's not connected.
>--
>Kind Regards,
>Rolf Brunsting - Darp - Netherlands
--
Quis spamondanet ipsos spamondanent?
Hognoxious
<9gr9ti$8nkmf$2...@reader02.wxs.nl> Rolf Brunsting issued this pearl of wisdom:
I can understand that happening, I've seen it in my work (which is generally
with slightly less portable hardware) often too. It's generally a data format
issue.
PsiWin actually does a pretty satisfactory job to * from word and excel
(although I'm having a bit of a nightmare with one particular sheet file, it
would be the one I keep my billable hours in, that's a different issue).
But my problem isn't, in general, to do with faulty synchronisation or data
conversion. I thought this was clear from my earlier posts. It is a lower
level problem - refusal to connect (& in certain situations unwillingness to
report this fact).
Hognoxious
<3b2e55de...@news.pacbell.net> Alasdair Manson issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>
>that's such a massive oversimplification as to be worthless, in my
>opinion.
"Eliminate the impossible; whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth".
That's a massive oversimplification. But it works.
Do you understand the basics of experimental design, varying a few parameters
(preferably one) while keeping the others constant? It's the same with
debugging software, it's the same with criminal investigation, it's the same
with getting a car to start. Process of elimination.
So lets keep this constant: Old fujitsu with win98. No modem. Internet
connection via lan.
Lets vary the software for talking to an external device, and whether outlook is
open or not. Note: same physical port, com port, speed even.
Outlook open
PsiWin - won't connect & won't report it.
Kodak picture transfer - OK
Outlook closed
PsiWin - OK
Kodak picture transfer - OK
I don't know how, from this data, it's possible to blame anything other than
PSiWin.
>in which case, in my opinion, you have your head firmly planted in the
>sand.
In which case I would conclude that the view from 12" below the desert is
somewhat superior to that from the same distance up your colon. That's just my
opinion, of course.
--
Rimem badia lamo
Philip Crookes
"Hognoxious" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote:
> So lets keep this constant: Old fujitsu with win98. No modem. Internet
> connection via lan.
> Lets vary the software for talking to an external device, and whether
outlook is
> open or not. Note: same physical port, com port, speed even.
>
> Outlook open
>
> PsiWin - won't connect & won't report it.
> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>
> Outlook closed
>
> PsiWin - OK
> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>
> I don't know how, from this data, it's possible to blame anything other
than
> PSiWin.
I'd blame Outlook, which is obviously doing something that makes PsiWin
(think it is) unable to access the relevant port.
I agree that PsiWin's fail messages are austere to the point of
unhelpfulness: it said it could not connect which you already knew because
it did not connect. Still, having grown up with CP/M, whose error messages
were limited to a terse "BDOS err on A", PsiWin is positively loquacious.
Back to our sheeps, and if the presence of Outlook makes PsiWin uable to
connect, it seems to me a logical assumption that there is a problem with
Outlook, because, according to your scientific method, nothing else has
changed.
Philip
Eirik Newth
> If it was a windows problem, then the Kodak app wouldn't work either.
That's too simplistic. On all my Windows installations (from 3.1 to 98)
PsiWin worked without so much as a hickup, while the connection software
which came with my Olympus C1400-L digital camera was so unstable I had to
get a SmartMedia adapter.
Using your reasoning I could argue that there was something seriously
wrong with the Olympus software while PsiWin was a flawless application.
But I won't. I blamed Windows instead and finally chucked it out as my main
OS last year... ;-)
Regards,
Eirik Newth
---
The Seven site: http://newth.net/psion7
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>...is somewhat superior to that from the same distance up your colon. That's just my
>opinion, of course.
lovely attitude as ever, hognoxious.
see you
ali
Mike Smith
news:WlmY6.3794$yp1.1...@www.newsranger.com...
>
> Outlook open
>
> PsiWin - won't connect & won't report it.
> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>
> Outlook closed
>
> PsiWin - OK
> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>
> I don't know how, from this data, it's possible to blame anything other
than
> PSiWin.
Why is this PsiWin's fault, and not Outlook's?
--
Mike Smith
Alasdair Manson
<smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>Why is this PsiWin's fault, and not Outlook's?
indeed.
i think this comes down to a simple difference of opinion. some people
seem to think that if other Windows applications interfere with the
serial port to the extent that PsiWin can't use it, that's PsiWin's
fault.
i agree that PsiWin could provide a little better guidance to users as
to the possible cause of the problem but that really is like telling
somebody that, if they can't park their car in their garage because
somebody else parked there, that's their fault. it's nonsense really.
i'm not so naive that i can't see this is not a black and white
problem. there are many, often subtle, variables.
my substantive point is that there are many non-PsiWin specific
problems for which PsiWin is 'blamed'. i have extensive personal
experience which supports this position.
the counter position (presumably) is that 100% of all PsiWin problems
are specific to PsiWin and are not caused by other symptomatic PC
problems, such as incorrectly installed or malfunctioning serial
ports.
that is, in my opinion, clearly absolute nonsense.
PsiWin is far from perfect but it's also used often as a convenient
scapegoat.
then there are others, like the somewhat appropriately named
Hognoxious whos contribution is to hide behind an alias and tell me i
have my head up my arse. i hope it makes him/her feel a little better
being nasty because that's pretty much all it achieves here, in my
opinion.
thanks for your post.
see you
ali
JF Mezei
> Back to our sheeps, and if the presence of Outlook makes PsiWin uable to
> connect, it seems to me a logical assumption that there is a problem with
> Outlook, because, according to your scientific method, nothing else has
> changed.
Not necessarily. It could still be a problem with PSIwin. Imagine that when
connected to Outlook, PSIwin fills some internal data structure and changes
the value of some variables and that interferes with the portion of the code
that deals with the serial port.
And it could also be the "fault" of PSIwin of relying on some Windows system
services (API) that are known to be buggy when used under certain circumstances.
I think that even Bill gates has admitted that Windows is riddled with bugs.
The trick to writing a reliable application when the underlying OS is riddled
with bugs is to use only the parts of the OS you know work reliably.
JF Mezei
> i think this comes down to a simple difference of opinion. some people
> seem to think that if other Windows applications interfere with the
> serial port to the extent that PsiWin can't use it, that's PsiWin's
> fault.
If another application interferes with a serial port, then the operating
system shouldn't let PSIwin get to that port. And if PSIwin has the port, the
OS shouldn't let other applications touch that port.
People are quick to blame the "serial ports". But what about PSIwin's design
itself ? I know from personal experience that PSIwin , even though it has
access to the port, transmits its own "hello I am here" to that port and sees
the data from the PSION come back, refuses to do the handshake and establish
the connection. (due to missing modem signals or whatever).
This has nothing to do with serial port problems, and has everything to do
with application design.
And it is also possible that PSIwin may have timing restrictions that make it
timeout before it actually gets the response from the PSION.
I had DOS application once (trying to reflash my GARMIN GPS) which would not
work because of the DOS application had very strict timing and the MAC,
emulating DOS was just a tad too slow).
But the end result is that a non-trivial number of people have problems with
PSIWIN on Windows. PSIwin provides no clue on why it does not wish to
establish the connection with the PSION. The end result is that an application
doesn't work. That application is supplied by PSION and is therefore PSION's
fault. Period.
PSION wrote the application (it was done prior to Symbian, remember), and
PSION chose the application architecture, and PSION chose to build it a
certain way on Windows. Even if PSION was naive to think that PSIwin would
work perfectly under windows, it has now been long enough that there is no
longer an excuse for PSIwin still having problems.
Alasdair Manson
<jfmezei...@videotron.ca> wrote:
>If another application interferes with a serial port, then the operating
>system shouldn't let PSIwin get to that port. And if PSIwin has the port, the
>OS shouldn't let other applications touch that port.
this will be the same OS that is "riddled with bugs" which you used as
an example earlier to support your position that, whatever is going
on, this is 100% PsiWin's "fault" and nothing whatsoever to do with
Windows being a flakey platform?
>That application is supplied by PSION and is therefore PSION's
>fault. Period.
you've made it abundantly clear over the years that you hold Psion
responsible for anything that goes wrong. even poorly-researched
purchasing decisions which you yourself made.
JF, Psion is always guilty in your eyes - what's the point even
discussing it? Period.
see you
ali
Mike Smith
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:31:32 -0400, "Mike Smith"
> <smi...@michaelsmithHATESSPAM.org> wrote:
>
> >Why is this PsiWin's fault, and not Outlook's?
>
> indeed.
>
> i think this comes down to a simple difference of opinion. some people
> seem to think that if other Windows applications interfere with the
> serial port to the extent that PsiWin can't use it, that's PsiWin's
> fault.
Uh, don't get me wrong, I *do* think that PsiWin is buggy in this regard.
(I have occasional bouts of PsiWinItis, and I have *no* other serial-port
grabbing programs on my machine.) I just didn't like Hognoxious's specific
example.
--
Mike Smith
RJCT
> JF, Psion is always guilty in your eyes - what's the point even
> discussing it? Period.
>
I thought he made some interesting and well reasoned points actually.
Alasdair Manson
wrote:
>I thought he made some interesting and well reasoned points actually.
i was placing his response in a wider context.
see you
ali
Hognoxious
<mXmY6.4119$sC3....@news1.oke.nextra.no> Eirik Newth issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>Hognoxious wrote:
>
>> If it was a windows problem, then the Kodak app wouldn't work either.
>
>That's too simplistic.
Then explain how it can be a hardware or os problem.
> On all my Windows installations (from 3.1 to 98)
>PsiWin worked without so much as a hickup, while the connection software
>which came with my Olympus C1400-L digital camera was so unstable I had to
>get a SmartMedia adapter.
Did you use it as I did? As I have said n times, it won't connect if outlook is
open. Logically, that must be 1) a problem with outlook or 2) a problem with
psiwin. But as other software (the Kodak stuff) works fine in the situation
where PsiWin doesn't, how can outlook (or bad port configurations, or any of the
others ) be the issue?
>Using your reasoning I could argue that there was something seriously
>wrong with the Olympus software
What, on the grounds that all else being equal, it's the thing that doesn't work
when others are fine?
Hello, welcome to the fascinating world of deductive reasoning.
Using my reasoning you would be right.
>while PsiWin was a flawless application.
Why would I conclude it was 'flawless'? I don't think everything is absolute.
What I would conclude is that under *your* conditions of use the bug does not
manifest itself. The fact that you've found a program worse than PsiWin doesn't
mean PsiWin is perfect.
>But I won't. I blamed Windows instead and finally chucked it out as my main
>OS last year... ;-)
So this software that didn't work under windows works fine under, say, MacOS
now? If that's true I believe you, logically it must be the OS if the same
executable runs fine on a different one. Not very likely though, is it?
Probably you don't use the Olympus software at all now, which doesn't prove it
one way or the other.
And, er, PsiWIn is available for which other Os?
Eirik Newth
> Then explain how it can be a hardware or os problem.
I can't, which is my point. I don't know your specific hardware setup or
which applications you've installed previously. But for all I know there's
a file or registry entry somewhere - not necessarily installed by PsiWin -
which may be the cause of your problems. Windows is a complex OS which in
itself is fully capable of producing the kind of behaviour you experience.
Don't take my word for it. Just take a look at any Windows newsgroup and
see some of the problems people complain about...
> psiwin. But as other software (the Kodak stuff) works fine in the
> situation where PsiWin doesn't, how can outlook (or bad port
> configurations, or any of the others ) be the issue?
See above.
> And, er, PsiWIn is available for which other Os?
If you read my post carefully (anonymous and rude posters like you seldom
do, I know), you would see that I used the term "_main_ OS". I still have
a Windoze laptop for those odd jobs (converting to/from MS Word files etc)
that require the blasted thing.
Mind you, I'm no big fan of PsiWin. For a number of reasons, I'm sceptical
of OS-specific applications converting between proprietary file formats and
convert Psion files into formats which are cross-platform compatible
whenever possible. Using e.g. nConvert and a CF card reader, it's possible
to replicate the most important functions of PsiWin without ever installing
the thing...
Hognoxious
<9gstrq$aq5fo$1...@ID-89693.news.dfncis.de> Philip Crookes issued this pearl of
wisdom:
>
>
>"Hognoxious" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote:
>
>> So lets keep this constant: Old fujitsu with win98. No modem. Internet
>> connection via lan.
>> Lets vary the software for talking to an external device, and whether
>outlook is
>> open or not. Note: same physical port, com port, speed even.
>>
>> Outlook open
>>
>> PsiWin - won't connect & won't report it.
>> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>>
>> Outlook closed
>>
>> PsiWin - OK
>> Kodak picture transfer - OK
>>
>> I don't know how, from this data, it's possible to blame anything other
>than
>> PSiWin.
>
>I'd blame Outlook, which is obviously doing something that makes PsiWin
>(think it is) unable to access the relevant port.
So let's get this right. Outlook is blocking PsiWin.
But hang on, it *doesn't* block the Kodac software. So outlook is intentionally
designed to block PsiWin. It must be targetting PsiWin specifically, because the
Kodak software is able to connect fine.
>Back to our sheeps, and if the presence of Outlook makes PsiWin uable to
>connect, it seems to me a logical assumption that there is a problem with
>Outlook, because, according to your scientific method, nothing else has
>changed.
It's not 'my' scientific method, thanks all the same. There are two independent
variables; Outlook (open/closed) and Type of connection software (PsiWin/Kodak).
Therefore your comment 'nothing else has changed' does not make sense to me in
this context. Looking at the PsiWin results alone you would probably conclude
it was outlook. Looking at the Kodak results means it can't be outlook alone.
Of course with two independent variables there is always the chance of
interaction effects. But then it's hard to think what the mechanism would be.
Perhaps it is outlook causing the problem, and PsiWin is just a little less
robust that the Kodak software. But that's hardly lets PsiWin off the hook; if
Kodak can do it, Psion could.
Perhaps M$ are pals with Kodak and give them the secret API call that works
correctly.
If both apps didn't work with outlook open, I wouldn't be in this thread; I
would have already concluded it was outlook. But that's not the case.
Stuart Moore
> > On all my Windows installations (from 3.1 to 98)
> >PsiWin worked without so much as a hickup, while the connection software
> >which came with my Olympus C1400-L digital camera was so unstable I had to
> >get a SmartMedia adapter.
>
> Did you use it as I did? As I have said n times, it won't connect if outlook
is
> open. Logically, that must be 1) a problem with outlook or 2) a problem with
> psiwin. But as other software (the Kodak stuff) works fine in the situation
> where PsiWin doesn't, how can outlook (or bad port configurations, or any of
the
> others ) be the issue?
Outlook could be the issue because it could interfeer with something that the
Psion software needs but the Kodak software doesn't. I'd agree that your
experience makes it less likely that it's a problem with the ports, although
still not impossible
>
> And, er, PsiWIn is available for which other Os?
By definition Windows, but isn't there a PsiMac or equivalent? That's a bit like
saying "Word for Windows is available for which other OS?" - none, but that
doesn't mean other OSs don't have direct equivalents, by the same manufacturer
or others.
Stuart Moore
> Thu, 21 Jun 2001 15:46:14 +0200 was an auspicious time, for in message
> <9gstrq$aq5fo$1...@ID-89693.news.dfncis.de> Philip Crookes issued this pearl of
> wisdom:
> >
> >(think it is) unable to access the relevant port.
>
> So let's get this right. Outlook is blocking PsiWin.
>
> But hang on, it *doesn't* block the Kodac software. So outlook is
intentionally
> designed to block PsiWin. It must be targetting PsiWin specifically, because
the
> Kodak software is able to connect fine.
Not necessarily. It could be that PsiWin uses a DLL that Outlook also uses (they
are designed to sync, so this isn't unlikely) but the Kodak software doesn't. If
OL misbehaves with this DLL, it could block Psiwin, without the outlook
programmers having done it deliberately at all, it's just a bug. This is beyond
Psiwin's control.
I'm not saying this is the case, it's just another posibility. I'm sure there
are others. It'd take one hell of a software engineer to work out which was in
fact the case.
Stuart
Eirik Newth
> By definition Windows, but isn't there a PsiMac or equivalent? That's a
> bit like saying "Word for Windows is available for which other OS?" -
> none, but that doesn't mean other OSs don't have direct equivalents, by
> the same manufacturer or others.
Funny you should mention it, but right now there's a pretty good Linux
replacement for the KDE environment, kalled KPsion. Still doesn't do
conversions on the fly and synchronization, but it does integrate the Psion
seamlessly into the Linux file tree. AFAIK there's also (a much maligned)
Macintosh connection package.