This Issue:

Answers for Three Common Questions
"Opera" and other Browser Alternatives
Avoiding Big Brother
Intel’s Hot Seat gets Hotter
More!

 Answers For Three Common Questions

I get over 300 emails a day, many of them asking for help with various hardware and software problems. I answer what I can, and am glad to help when I’m able. But even at a minute or two per mail, I could spend my whole day doing nothing but giving free tech support by mail, and I'd slowly go broke! 8-)

Three questions come up more often than any others, so it’s probably worthwhile to go over the answers here. Maybe you’ve had these questions, or know someone who does. In any case, by answering them here, and having them in the permanent LangaList archives in the What’s New section of Langa.Com, it’s my hope that many readers can get the information they need far more easily than by sending emails into the void.

If you used Windows "Startup Disk" to make an emergency bootable floppy disk, you’ve probably realized how incomplete it is. The Startup Disk will not give you access to your CD-Rom or any other device that requires DOS-level drivers, for example.

So, if you make a Startup Disk expecting to be able to use it to rebuild your system after a bad crash, you may be unpleasantly surprised when your system boots fine from the floppy but then won’t let you access your CD to reinstall Windows or any other software. You can be left dead in the water.

Fortunately, it’s easy to modify the Startup Disk to give you access to DOS-level devices. I’ll focus on CD-ROM drives (they’re the most common), but you could use the same technique for any other device---tape drives, network drivers, etc---you might have. I’ll assume your CD ROM (or whatever) is correctly installed and does work properly when you boot to DOS on your regular system’s hard drive.

That’s it. The boot floppy should now contain all the DOS-level drivers and commands you need to access your CD ROM and similar devices, giving you a truly complete boot disk!

Everyone loves to hate Internet Explorer or Netscape Communicator, or both. But what are the real alternatives?

Maybe, like me, you’ve heard effusive praise for small browsers like Opera. In last week’s BBS discussion, for example, Rob Farrell wrote, "Opera is a browser which just about fits on a floppy and runs circles around the giants speedwise -- extremely refreshing. I shall never be downloading another 8-17 MB revised version or "patch" of bloatware again!"

But there is another side. Garrison Netzel replied, "I downloaded and installed Opera after seeing countless reports about the ‘little browser that could’ in magazines, on TV and on the Web. Opera seems to be the media darling of the minute. But it didn't seem to run any faster than MSIE 4.01… and the interface was a mess. I made the mistake of clicking on Menu (the first item in the "View" menu) just to see what would happen, and in order to get my menu bars back, I had to close the program and re-start it. Nice one-way toggle there, Opera…."

Monday (8-Jun-98) the Federal trade Commission is expected to file a suit against Intel for unfair business practices, making the current CMPnet discussion on Intel very timely. If the suite goes forward, is it good or bad for end users? Good or bad for the computer industry? Good or bad for you? I’d love to hear your opinions. Join in over at http://www.langa.com/badlink.htm.

Can the computer industry police itself? The early indications suggest maybe not.

Last week, a press release hit the wires. It said (in part) "Twelve high technology trade associations, representing more than 11,000 information technology companies, today sent a letter to President Clinton announcing an industry-led, self-regulatory plan to address online privacy concerns. The group developed the plan over the past four months, in part to be responsive to a call from the Clinton Administration for private sector leadership in the protection of personal data in an electronic environment, and to extend their long-standing commitment to customer privacy into the digital environment."

In reality, the "call" from Clinton was more of an ultimatum: About a year ago, he gave the industry until July of this year---now just three weeks away---to clean up its act and develop a plan to protect online privacy. The implicit threat was that if the industry didn’t police itself, the Government would.

There’s a fair amount of hypocrisy in Clinton’s position: While calling for privacy protection on the one hand, his administration has sought to prevent the adoption of powerful encryption standards that make *very* private many forms of electronic communication.

Personally, I wish the Government would back off and stay out of areas like this---but they probably won’t. I also fervently wish the Industry could get its act in gear and really police itself--- controlling spam, providing secure communications, protecting kids and others unable to protect themselves, and enabling us to be fully engaged but as private as we wish. It’s not a tech issue—the tools are there. But it probably won’t happen either, as the details of the Industry proposal suggests.

I’ll tell you those details and also tell you why I think ham-handed, ineffective Government interference is inevitable, in the new CMPnet column that will go live on Wednesday. What’s your take? Is Government control of online privacy inevitable? Will the Industry rally and manage to effectively police itself, and thus stave off Government action? Or is the Internet simply synonymous with anarchy, and not likely to accept policing from anyone, ever? Join the discussion starting Wednesday at http://www.langa.com/badlink.htm.

We’re just two weeks from the retail appearance of Windows98. Two full-length, illustrated articles on Win98 are waiting for you at http://www.browsertune.com/win98.htm.

The first will help you decide if it’s worth your time, trouble, and money to upgrade to Win98. The second will show you exactly what you can do to make sure your current system is as solid as it can be before upgrading---or for that matter, just to make it work as well as possible even if you don’t upgrade!

Reader Aime F. Watts alerted me to these new viruses:

From the self-promotion department, I’m pleased to announce that I’m now consulting with Earthweb, the publishers of Developer.Com, Gamelan, and several other great sites. I’ll be serving as Chairman of their Editorial Board, and helping them build their internal editorial operations.

This is in addition to my existing work as Senior Consulting Editor for Windows Magazine; columnist for CMPnet; and consulting to a number of smaller companies. You can see what I’m involved with by visiting http://www.langa.com/about_fred.htm. If I can help you or your company, please drop me a note; it’s that for-pay work that enables my to offer free services such as this newsletter---and the many emails I try to answer each day! 8-)

See you next week!

Best,

A formatted HTML version available in the "what's new" section of http://www.langa.com.

==========

Why are you getting this newsletter? There are only two ways to get on the list (direct email request or via the WinMag list signup page) so if you're getting this newsletter; your name came to me through one of these channels:

SUBSCRIBE: Send email to subscribe-langalist@lyris.dundee.net. Please put the word "subscribe" in the email's subject line.

UNSUBSCRIBE: Send email to remove@langa.com. Please put the word "remove" in the subject line.

CHANGE OF ADDRESS: Send email to remove@langa.com from the old account; put the word "remove" in the subject line. Then simply subscribe from the new account, as described in "Subscribe" above.

DUPLICATE COPIES? If you accidentally receive more than one copy of this note to the same email address, please send email to duplicate@langa.com. Please include your preferred email address in the body of the note, and if you know what the incorrect addressing was, I'll be sure to manually weed out any other addresses I have.

If you're receiving duplicates at different email addresses, just unsubscribe (see above) from the address you don't want on the list.