where has "msconfig" gone?
hi i need to remove some programs from startup but program msconfig has gone?!? where is it? or where can i get it from? i am using windows 2000 advanced server please help
hi i need to remove some programs from startup but program "msconfig" has gone?!? where is it? or where can i get it from?
i am using windows 2000 advanced server
please help
i am using windows 2000 advanced server
please help
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
There's nothing particularly noble about going into the registry to find and fix startup item issues. I've seen a lot of posts about this, and how to clear out this folder and that folder and which registry keys to check, and darned few of those "answers" contained complete listings of the areas to check.
A freeware applet like the Starup Control Panel suggested by DosFreak saves time and reduces the risk of error in registry editing. Especially if you're going to be doing this sort of thing frequently, why in the world wouldn't you use a utility?
My $.02.
Regards,
Jim
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 20 December 2000).]
A freeware applet like the Starup Control Panel suggested by DosFreak saves time and reduces the risk of error in registry editing. Especially if you're going to be doing this sort of thing frequently, why in the world wouldn't you use a utility?
My $.02.
Regards,
Jim
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 20 December 2000).]
For the same reason I copy floppy disks from a DOS Window.
The same reason I do:
dir p*.* /s/p from a DOS Window
The same reason why when I have copied all the CAB files over on a Win98 installation I run regedit and browse to the 'Source' location and manually edit it.
I use what I'm used to and regedit is a lot more powerfull than any of the apps you can download.
All of the edits I've made on our live Win2k servers are done via regedit, once you know your way around the registry it becomes very second nature.
[This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 21 December 2000).]
The same reason I do:
dir p*.* /s/p from a DOS Window
The same reason why when I have copied all the CAB files over on a Win98 installation I run regedit and browse to the 'Source' location and manually edit it.
I use what I'm used to and regedit is a lot more powerfull than any of the apps you can download.
All of the edits I've made on our live Win2k servers are done via regedit, once you know your way around the registry it becomes very second nature.
[This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 21 December 2000).]
That's not the point, as any experienced computer user or sysadmin knows. If a person asks "where has MSCONFIG gone", you don't tell that person to edit the registry -- at least not unless you intend to be of some real help in giving instruction. Besides, the information that was given about editing the registry was incomplete, to say the least. The novice is not helped by someone who merely seeks to impress him or her with a superiority of knowledge.
That anyone should choose to use a command line or edit the registry manually is not in the least bit impressive, in and of itself. A craftsman uses the appropriate tool for the job, not the most "powerful", the most efficient. Sometimes editing the registry or issuing a command from the command prompt is more efficient than using the GUI, and sometimes it isn't. If it were efficient to remove a newly arrived startup item following a software installation by navigating through the registry to these places:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServicesOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServicesOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows, the "run" and Load" keys
to do the inspection and editing, and then going to the startup folders for the current user, and for all other users who may have been affected by the installation, then that's what I'd do. Startup Control Panel allows a user, expert or novice, to view the contents of the startup locations -- all of them -- in one simple operation. It is a proven utility and an excellent tool. I think it's also the more "powerful" tool in this case because it's the more "efficient" tool.
Regards,
Jim
That anyone should choose to use a command line or edit the registry manually is not in the least bit impressive, in and of itself. A craftsman uses the appropriate tool for the job, not the most "powerful", the most efficient. Sometimes editing the registry or issuing a command from the command prompt is more efficient than using the GUI, and sometimes it isn't. If it were efficient to remove a newly arrived startup item following a software installation by navigating through the registry to these places:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServicesOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServicesOnce
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows, the "run" and Load" keys
to do the inspection and editing, and then going to the startup folders for the current user, and for all other users who may have been affected by the installation, then that's what I'd do. Startup Control Panel allows a user, expert or novice, to view the contents of the startup locations -- all of them -- in one simple operation. It is a proven utility and an excellent tool. I think it's also the more "powerful" tool in this case because it's the more "efficient" tool.
Regards,
Jim
The simple facts are if somebody asks me where has 'msconfig' gone I tell them to get the hell off the Win2k platform and drop back to Win9x.
Users shouldn't be playing with their workstations, anything that I want changing on a users PC I will fire out accross the network the next time they login.
It's not about being 'big & clever'
For our servers and machines I am sat in front of working on I will use 'regedit'
It's powerfull and as I know my way around the registry it is efficient to me.
I don't do everything from the registry, if the links are already in place with Win2k I'll use those.
It would be crazy to do something directly in the registry if you have a 'Control Panel' icon that will do it for you, but I wont add third-party utilities of that nature to a machine.
If somebody asks you 'Where has msconfig gone?' you need to ask them why, what are you trying to do?
A good amount of things can be done directly within Win2k, if it requires access to registry keys then they shouldn't be attempting it.
Would you give a COBOL programmer admin access to your C++ Source Code.
Users shouldn't be playing with their workstations, anything that I want changing on a users PC I will fire out accross the network the next time they login.
It's not about being 'big & clever'
For our servers and machines I am sat in front of working on I will use 'regedit'
It's powerfull and as I know my way around the registry it is efficient to me.
I don't do everything from the registry, if the links are already in place with Win2k I'll use those.
It would be crazy to do something directly in the registry if you have a 'Control Panel' icon that will do it for you, but I wont add third-party utilities of that nature to a machine.
If somebody asks you 'Where has msconfig gone?' you need to ask them why, what are you trying to do?
A good amount of things can be done directly within Win2k, if it requires access to registry keys then they shouldn't be attempting it.
Would you give a COBOL programmer admin access to your C++ Source Code.
It's none of your business to tell someone "to get the hell off the Win2k platform and drop back to Win9x". Do you believe that you own information technology in its entirety? Who do you think you are? A person who asks for help on a personal machine doesn't need your snobbery. There's no offer to help in your approach, only a nasty slight.
You're talking to people online in a way you wouldn't dare to speak to them in person. And everyone can see that. I have grave doubts that you're very accomplished at all in this field. But even if you are, your attitude prevents you of being of any value to someone like the originator of this thread. We're supposed to be here to help each other, not to slam each other.
You're talking to people online in a way you wouldn't dare to speak to them in person. And everyone can see that. I have grave doubts that you're very accomplished at all in this field. But even if you are, your attitude prevents you of being of any value to someone like the originator of this thread. We're supposed to be here to help each other, not to slam each other.
i agree with the go back to 9x comment on a certain level, because people using NT boxes should know enough about the NT structure to be proficent in it, not master it but be proficient like at least knowing where stuff is. NT isn't a little kids platform like 9x/ME is so for the benefit of those users that aren't that familiar or good with windows then they shouldn't be using a NT OS. But to be as ignorant as to say the 9x comment is something different. All i ask is that people treat each other with respect and professionalism on these boards.
I don't think I told anybody on this forum to get off the WinNT platform.
However your ***umption is incorrect.
It is how I will speak to somebody, although maybe I wont quite use those choice words.
Who am I to say that to people?
I am a Systems Administrator who has to put up with users saying they want Win2k on their workstations and then complaining that it doesn't work in the same way their old OS did.
I have to sit through people telling me how they installed Win2k at home and now don't know how to use it.
I think I'm in the perfect position to say this.
Why would you move to an OS that you simply don't know how to use?
This is why Microsoft are using the 'Win2k is for business use only' stance on things.
Because if the full truth came out, that Win2k is more than acceptable for home use for applications & games but without crashes then everyone would install it.
MS's support lines would be filled with calls saying 'So, where has msconfig gone?'
First you sit back and tell me not to talk in that fashion and then do a direct attack on me:
I have grave doubts that you're very accomplished at all in this field.
I am a Systems Administrator for a communications company here in the UK with approx. 100 users.
I single-handedly upgraded the network from one single workstation acting as a SBS4.5 server to a multi-server Windows 2000 Server based network.
Along with this I had to fully integrate it into an exisiting LINUX/UNIX system (that forms a core part of our work)
If you actually worked in the industry you would know what kind of questions you get from users and you would also know that telling people they are using the wrong OS and to go back to the correct one goes with the job.
I fully appreciate it is Christmas, good will etc, but I will not take personal attacks.
If you had bothered to read through the whole of this thread you would have seen that the original question was answered by the second post, my subsequent posts followed up the discusion on using the registry.
However your ***umption is incorrect.
It is how I will speak to somebody, although maybe I wont quite use those choice words.
Who am I to say that to people?
I am a Systems Administrator who has to put up with users saying they want Win2k on their workstations and then complaining that it doesn't work in the same way their old OS did.
I have to sit through people telling me how they installed Win2k at home and now don't know how to use it.
I think I'm in the perfect position to say this.
Why would you move to an OS that you simply don't know how to use?
This is why Microsoft are using the 'Win2k is for business use only' stance on things.
Because if the full truth came out, that Win2k is more than acceptable for home use for applications & games but without crashes then everyone would install it.
MS's support lines would be filled with calls saying 'So, where has msconfig gone?'
First you sit back and tell me not to talk in that fashion and then do a direct attack on me:
I have grave doubts that you're very accomplished at all in this field.
I am a Systems Administrator for a communications company here in the UK with approx. 100 users.
I single-handedly upgraded the network from one single workstation acting as a SBS4.5 server to a multi-server Windows 2000 Server based network.
Along with this I had to fully integrate it into an exisiting LINUX/UNIX system (that forms a core part of our work)
If you actually worked in the industry you would know what kind of questions you get from users and you would also know that telling people they are using the wrong OS and to go back to the correct one goes with the job.
I fully appreciate it is Christmas, good will etc, but I will not take personal attacks.
If you had bothered to read through the whole of this thread you would have seen that the original question was answered by the second post, my subsequent posts followed up the discusion on using the registry.
BladeRunner,
The question was answered by the second post -- exactly. And the added comments about a person's ability to choose what OS s/he wants to use weren't necessary or helpful. I'm offended when I see this unhelpful attitude on the part of anyone in an environment where people are supposed to be helping each other. The fact that a person doesn't meet your minimum standards for use of a given operating system in your working environment hardly qualifies as a reason to suggest that he shouldn't be using that OS in his own situation.
"I am a Systems Administrator who has to put up with users saying they want Win2k on their workstations and then complaining that it doesn't work in the same way their old OS did.
I have to sit through people telling me how they installed Win2k at home and now don't know how to use it.
I think I'm in the perfect position to say this.
Why would you move to an OS that you simply don't know how to use?"
Please remember that some people are just trying to keep up with the learning curve, to learn about these systems on their own; that not everyone else's experience and educational path must match your own. Not everyone is a career systems guru. Most people are just end users, and their questions, while perhaps not particularly interesting or challenging to someone like you, are their way of trying to learn about something new (to them). Most people feel pressed to "keep up with the times", but it is also normal for them to feel peevish when they must cope with change. That's just human nature. The mere fact that this person knew about MSCONFIG puts him / her a cut above a great many Win98 users, doesn't it? I met a guy the other day who has had system failure after system failure. Turned out he's been switching the machine off with a power strip button. His system has never been shut down properly -- except when it was in the shop!
It sounds like you're not very happy in having to deal with end users. I can't see how that would work out well for you in your position. It must be very frustrating. I have a different attitude about end users. I feel fortunate when I'm able to help someone with a problem, even if it's a really simple one and not a real test of my mettle. I also take the opportunity, when it presents itself, to try to teach the asker how to find the answers to his own questions. (The utility that DosFreak mentioned actually indicates the registry locations for the values being controlled, one of many reasons why I like it.)
If you think my suggestion about your knowledge level was a personal attack, how would you think a newcomer to this operating system might feel about your "get the hell off" comment? I worded my comment poorly because I was angry. I'll admit that I'm annoyed when I see someone with a high opinion of his own accomplishments who is, at the same time, unwilling to share his knowledge with others. I also ask myself why that person would care to be involved in a forum? Unless this is an exclusive forum for the use of experts only?
Your position, while indicating that you have a lot of experience in dealing with LANs, is not unique in the world. I designed then managed a network of imaging and radiation safety analysis systems that constituted a few under 500 workstations and 24 servers. And that was my "side job", since my primary field was radiation physics. While it's true that some end users can be difficult to deal with, it does no one any good to dismiss them out of hand. I found it frustrating to deal with some of them, to be sure, but I also felt that it was rewarding to find a way to help even the most difficult of them to cope with the tools they needed to do their jobs. I hope you understand that, if an end user perceives condescension or hostility from you, it's not going to make your overall task as a sysadmin any easier.
Please accept my apology for goading you with the comment about your level of knowledge, but accept it with the awareness that perhaps others experience the same angry reaction that you experienced when you cast aspersions about their innate abilities to deal with the intricacies of operating systems that are, after all, your strength. Those people have their own areas of expertise but have to depend upon you because of the working relationships among you, their tools and themselves. You, however, do not normally have to depend upon them for any kind of help. This is the type of one-sided relationship that tends to breed contempt on one side and rebellion on the other. An adversarial relationship will compromise the ability of everyone in the situation to function well. I know exactly what I'm talking about here. When I was young, I was exactly the same way about physics. I didn't think people who had trouble with physics should be allowed to vote or drive. Still not sure about the latter.
Again, my apologies.
Regards,
Jim
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 22 December 2000).] -- danged typos!
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 22 December 2000).]
The question was answered by the second post -- exactly. And the added comments about a person's ability to choose what OS s/he wants to use weren't necessary or helpful. I'm offended when I see this unhelpful attitude on the part of anyone in an environment where people are supposed to be helping each other. The fact that a person doesn't meet your minimum standards for use of a given operating system in your working environment hardly qualifies as a reason to suggest that he shouldn't be using that OS in his own situation.
"I am a Systems Administrator who has to put up with users saying they want Win2k on their workstations and then complaining that it doesn't work in the same way their old OS did.
I have to sit through people telling me how they installed Win2k at home and now don't know how to use it.
I think I'm in the perfect position to say this.
Why would you move to an OS that you simply don't know how to use?"
Please remember that some people are just trying to keep up with the learning curve, to learn about these systems on their own; that not everyone else's experience and educational path must match your own. Not everyone is a career systems guru. Most people are just end users, and their questions, while perhaps not particularly interesting or challenging to someone like you, are their way of trying to learn about something new (to them). Most people feel pressed to "keep up with the times", but it is also normal for them to feel peevish when they must cope with change. That's just human nature. The mere fact that this person knew about MSCONFIG puts him / her a cut above a great many Win98 users, doesn't it? I met a guy the other day who has had system failure after system failure. Turned out he's been switching the machine off with a power strip button. His system has never been shut down properly -- except when it was in the shop!
It sounds like you're not very happy in having to deal with end users. I can't see how that would work out well for you in your position. It must be very frustrating. I have a different attitude about end users. I feel fortunate when I'm able to help someone with a problem, even if it's a really simple one and not a real test of my mettle. I also take the opportunity, when it presents itself, to try to teach the asker how to find the answers to his own questions. (The utility that DosFreak mentioned actually indicates the registry locations for the values being controlled, one of many reasons why I like it.)
If you think my suggestion about your knowledge level was a personal attack, how would you think a newcomer to this operating system might feel about your "get the hell off" comment? I worded my comment poorly because I was angry. I'll admit that I'm annoyed when I see someone with a high opinion of his own accomplishments who is, at the same time, unwilling to share his knowledge with others. I also ask myself why that person would care to be involved in a forum? Unless this is an exclusive forum for the use of experts only?
Your position, while indicating that you have a lot of experience in dealing with LANs, is not unique in the world. I designed then managed a network of imaging and radiation safety analysis systems that constituted a few under 500 workstations and 24 servers. And that was my "side job", since my primary field was radiation physics. While it's true that some end users can be difficult to deal with, it does no one any good to dismiss them out of hand. I found it frustrating to deal with some of them, to be sure, but I also felt that it was rewarding to find a way to help even the most difficult of them to cope with the tools they needed to do their jobs. I hope you understand that, if an end user perceives condescension or hostility from you, it's not going to make your overall task as a sysadmin any easier.
Please accept my apology for goading you with the comment about your level of knowledge, but accept it with the awareness that perhaps others experience the same angry reaction that you experienced when you cast aspersions about their innate abilities to deal with the intricacies of operating systems that are, after all, your strength. Those people have their own areas of expertise but have to depend upon you because of the working relationships among you, their tools and themselves. You, however, do not normally have to depend upon them for any kind of help. This is the type of one-sided relationship that tends to breed contempt on one side and rebellion on the other. An adversarial relationship will compromise the ability of everyone in the situation to function well. I know exactly what I'm talking about here. When I was young, I was exactly the same way about physics. I didn't think people who had trouble with physics should be allowed to vote or drive. Still not sure about the latter.
Again, my apologies.
Regards,
Jim
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 22 December 2000).] -- danged typos!
[This message has been edited by jaywallen (edited 22 December 2000).]
<Applause>
There appears to be an undercurrent among some users on this board of elitism concerning who should and shouldn't be using Windows 2000. Perhaps it stems from (a) the fact that they may be sysadmins in their work and frustrated with endusers messing their systems up or ( folks who downloaded the latest and greatest OS and now gloat about their superior knowledge.
In either case, the best help is to educate by example. The one biggest hurdle in dealing with the IT folks where I work is their attitude towards the enduser (i.e. all endusers are morons). Consequently, I have worked out "ways" of working around them <g>. It troubles me to see this board, which has been a great resource over the past 1.5 years for me, becoming similar to that with which I have to work on a daily basis.
I also notice that there is an attitude developing that the more posts you have under your name, the more qualified you are. At the same time, the number of posts appear to be declining as the months go by. Maybe this could be due to: Windows 2000 becoming old news for many people; a tone that is being set within the forum members that is less productive than existed a year ago; or increasing frustrations over the sluggishness of this forum when it comes to accessing it <g>. You decide...
------------------
Shrink
92% of the things we worry about don't happen - but the other 8% DO!
PIII 650@850
BE6-II Mobo with 320 mb ram
20 gig Quantum KX 8 gig Quantum CR
SBlive Value
All In Wonder Radeon 32MB
... and a bunch of USB Stuff
Windows 2000 Pro Retail
[This message has been edited by Shrink (edited 22 December 2000).]
There appears to be an undercurrent among some users on this board of elitism concerning who should and shouldn't be using Windows 2000. Perhaps it stems from (a) the fact that they may be sysadmins in their work and frustrated with endusers messing their systems up or ( folks who downloaded the latest and greatest OS and now gloat about their superior knowledge.
In either case, the best help is to educate by example. The one biggest hurdle in dealing with the IT folks where I work is their attitude towards the enduser (i.e. all endusers are morons). Consequently, I have worked out "ways" of working around them <g>. It troubles me to see this board, which has been a great resource over the past 1.5 years for me, becoming similar to that with which I have to work on a daily basis.
I also notice that there is an attitude developing that the more posts you have under your name, the more qualified you are. At the same time, the number of posts appear to be declining as the months go by. Maybe this could be due to: Windows 2000 becoming old news for many people; a tone that is being set within the forum members that is less productive than existed a year ago; or increasing frustrations over the sluggishness of this forum when it comes to accessing it <g>. You decide...
------------------
Shrink
92% of the things we worry about don't happen - but the other 8% DO!
PIII 650@850
BE6-II Mobo with 320 mb ram
20 gig Quantum KX 8 gig Quantum CR
SBlive Value
All In Wonder Radeon 32MB
... and a bunch of USB Stuff
Windows 2000 Pro Retail
[This message has been edited by Shrink (edited 22 December 2000).]
A Merry Christmas to one & all.
Here's to 10 days of not having to think about computers, well except on New Years day to make sure things are still 'ticking over'.
Here's to 10 days of not having to think about computers, well except on New Years day to make sure things are still 'ticking over'.
I just wanted to point out that WHISTLER will be based in NT, so spect more questions like "where has msconfig gone" soon.
Also, bladerunner (I hate that movie), this is a technical support forum, so, If you don't like answering questions like this, then...ignore this post:rolleyest.
Merry christmas, happy new year, and new millenium (because IT STARTS in 2001, and not 2000 like many people beleived in 1999 ).
Also, bladerunner (I hate that movie), this is a technical support forum, so, If you don't like answering questions like this, then...ignore this post:rolleyest.
Merry christmas, happy new year, and new millenium (because IT STARTS in 2001, and not 2000 like many people beleived in 1999 ).
You don't like the greatest movie of all time, shame on you!
Thinks:
Maybe I'll pop over to www.brainsurgery.com and post:
'Hi, well I've opened up the head, now, which part was I supposed to work on again?'
It's all in the homework.
Thinks:
Maybe I'll pop over to www.brainsurgery.com and post:
'Hi, well I've opened up the head, now, which part was I supposed to work on again?'
It's all in the homework.
"Here's to 10 days of not having to think about computers, ."
Muahahhaha. This is why I will take over THE WORLD. MUST....NOT...LEAVE....COMPUTER...MIGHT...MISS...IMPORTANT....INFO....
The registry is a very important and interesting part of Windows. I like to pick through it as much as anybody else. But when I constantly install systems I do not want to have to look through the registry to go to a registry key when I could just install the proggie and click off a checkbox. Also the fact that Startup Control Panel saves your previous stuff is very handy. I also get ALOT of users wanting to know how to disable "the startup stuff ". I point them to Startup Control Panel. If they want to know more then they can research further.
You see, end users want something that performs a specific function. If they want to disable something at startup they don't need to know the history of the registry or what the heck the registry is. THEY JUST WANT TO DISABLE SOMETHING AT STARTUP. Just like if I wanted to replace the alternator on my car. I don't wanna know what the latest model is or who the heck made. Just gimme the dang alternator so I can get my car working again.
Muahahhaha. This is why I will take over THE WORLD. MUST....NOT...LEAVE....COMPUTER...MIGHT...MISS...IMPORTANT....INFO....
The registry is a very important and interesting part of Windows. I like to pick through it as much as anybody else. But when I constantly install systems I do not want to have to look through the registry to go to a registry key when I could just install the proggie and click off a checkbox. Also the fact that Startup Control Panel saves your previous stuff is very handy. I also get ALOT of users wanting to know how to disable "the startup stuff ". I point them to Startup Control Panel. If they want to know more then they can research further.
You see, end users want something that performs a specific function. If they want to disable something at startup they don't need to know the history of the registry or what the heck the registry is. THEY JUST WANT TO DISABLE SOMETHING AT STARTUP. Just like if I wanted to replace the alternator on my car. I don't wanna know what the latest model is or who the heck made. Just gimme the dang alternator so I can get my car working again.
Quote:You don't like the greatest movie of all time, shame on you!
The greatest movie of all time is TITANIC.
(And the best sci-fi movie would be Matrix, I presume).
The greatest movie of all time is TITANIC.
(And the best sci-fi movie would be Matrix, I presume).
Bah!
If you like your films to be nothing but special effects then those two certainly fit the bill.
Titanic - don't get me started, looked all very nice but found it a little boring.
Matrix - Nice enough story line and yes the special effects were all very nice.
You can't compare films on special effects only, when Blade Runner was released they didn't have the technology they have now.
To this day Blade Runner still has unanswered questions, the source of many discussions.
Anyway, I'll post no more on the subject, we seem to have gone way OT.
If you like your films to be nothing but special effects then those two certainly fit the bill.
Titanic - don't get me started, looked all very nice but found it a little boring.
Matrix - Nice enough story line and yes the special effects were all very nice.
You can't compare films on special effects only, when Blade Runner was released they didn't have the technology they have now.
To this day Blade Runner still has unanswered questions, the source of many discussions.
Anyway, I'll post no more on the subject, we seem to have gone way OT.
