Yep, happy to have been of use ,
To be fair, there is a difference in the level of bul***** in the two articles.
The difference is that once you read them the itprotoday is "honest", i.e. it is a report of something that happened and that in that particular case was actually a "restore", and misses the link to the userinit possible issue (as the Author didn't need it), whilst the petri one is (as often happens on that site) the usual attempt at "examplification to the masses" of something that by rewording it (without ever testing the method) is likely to induce the reader into committing a (very regrettable) mistake. Still, it has the link to the possible issue with userinit BUT without citing it in the text.
So, on one hand the first is not so bad, as reading it, even if it is incomplete, it becomes clear that it applies to a specific situation, while the second is IMHO actually misleading, the :
"For the most part, this is not recommended, especially if the drive letter is the same as when Windows was installed."
should have been written as :
"Do not EVEN THINK of doing this UNLESS you are in the specific case detailed in the linked MS KB"
jaclaz