dencorso

Any compatible with the latest 1155 Ivy Bridge, but I'd begin looking for any mobo based on the H61, and from there on any other Cougar Point southbridge, up to the Z68.

Ditto! Happy Holidays to you all!

Run pci-z on it. Let's get the identifiers of those unknowns. I still bet proper audio drivers are findable.

How so? Could you please post a pic of that? And yes, I bet the drivers from a 1155 mobo should work, maybe with some tweaking, for the HD Audio.

You surely will end up finding an appropriate HD AUDIO driver but maybe you'll have to tweak the .INF a little. Now, the pair of unusable back-panel USB 3.0 connectors (that can be used as 2.0, however) is sadder...

I think (but I may be wrong at it) that the very last version of PDFWriter came with Adobe Acrobat 5.0, but it was standalone, as it always was and did not require Acrobat's Licence Key to be installed or run, since it is unredistributable but freeware, IIRR.

Absolutely. Both the "LBA of first absolute sector in the partition" and the "Total # of sectors in the partition" are unsigned 32-bit numbers and count sectors (see, for instance, MBR#PTE), so that there are just 2^32 sectors available in total, for an MBR, and that's 2.2 TB or 2 TiB, for 512-bit sectors. Now, if 4KiB sectors are used, then the MBR can count up to 16 TiB. But that usually perplexes current OSes (albeit maybe not 8+ ?). More info from IBM: <link>... and at the Starman's page on MBRs, of course. As much as you tried to make that clear, you start with "Absolutely" then proceed to describe that the number of sectors in the partition must be 2^32. Noting that you did not say "in all partitions". So, please forgive me, but I'm assuming you're saying the following is NOT possible in a practical sense (notwithstanding jaclaz's special backflips) on a machine with BIOS only... One 4096 GB driveContaining two partitions, each 2048 GBOne of which is a bootable primary partitionOne of which is some other kind of partition comprising the rest of the drive ... because the MBR nomenclature specifies LBAs in 32 bits only. Did I get that right? Regarding sizes... We are only entering the age of huge data and huge performance. -Noel With 512-byte sectors, the maximum size possible for a MBR is 2 TiB because the LBAs count ordinally all the sectors in the whole disk using a single 32-bit number. Hence a 4096 GiB disk is not possible at all with 512-byte sectors. It may still be done with 4 KiB sectors, in some special circumstances, but then it's doubtful whether any current OS, 8+ and 10 included, will be able to boot from it (that is, from a non-512-byte sectored disk MBR). That's all.

No. Use Qt4 versions.

Absolutely. Both the "LBA of first absolute sector in the partition" and the "Total # of sectors in the partition" are unsigned 32-bit numbers and count sectors (see, for instance, MBR#PTE), so that there are just 2^32 sectors available in total, for an MBR, and that's 2.2 TB or 2 TiB, for 512-bit sectors. Now, if 4KiB sectors are used, then the MBR can count up to 16 TiB. But that usually perplexes current OSes (albeit maybe not 8+ ?). More info from IBM: <link>... and at the Starman's page on MBRs, of course. Now, while it cannot be done easily with internal HDDs, it can be done with USB (2.0 or 3.0) even on XP, as you can read here. So, with the proper RAID hardware, maybe you can accomplish it, too... but the sole trick remains using sectors bigger than 0.5 KiB.

No KernelEx needed. What is needed is Adobe PDFWriter, which actually does not work on the NT-family OSes, just on 9x/ME. As everything from Adobe, though, it's a non-redistributable, so it cannot be attached to MSFN, in case someone still has it.

Paid AVG. Once you get a license, you can ask for a downgrade to AVG 9.0... then you install it, upgrade the engine and continue to get definitions updates all right.

WHO are the "we"? When I wrote that the "we" I had in mind was "JoelC and me", because I already did know about his fixation on booting from huge volumes, and I was trying to accomodate that. What I actually do is: using 64 GiB for either 7 x86 ou 7 x64, 40 GiB for XP (usually I have two different such boot partitions), 10 GiB for 98SE, DOS 7.1, grub4DOS, and porteus (either x86 or x64, depending on the machine, from ISO). Each boot partition has its own separate backup set, but I skip backing up those boot partitions not used on a given week, keeping instead the backup from the previous week.

We have really different aproaches to it, but I'd partition something like 1 TB system (backed up weekely, and before any patch Tuesday, by cold forensic imaging) and 3 TB data (backed up daily, incrementally, on a file basis, with XXCOPY). Both back ups held in different external USB 3.0 HDDs (two each: most recent and previous or even and odd). Just my 2¢, of course!

Wow! Great contribution, thanks! So, here's a little addition to it (attached): a version of the Gavotte readme.txt fully in (maybe somewhat broken) English, as a pure ASCII text file, and the MS-LPL as plain text. TXTs.7z

No. You're actually right. Even the lock is optional to both it seems. I do have an SR-209: it's Depth is 18"3/16 (19"1/4 with the front bezel). And both take a 120 mm fan at the back and up to two 92 mm fans in front (middle and lower). I gave mine three Noctuas, which one barely hears any sound from.

Ain't that a Chenbro SR209? Chenbro chassis do rock!

Last time I checked, surely more than a couple years ago, most of the content in the comp. groups was spam... And there was scanty a relevant post in rec.pets.cats and alt.usage.english, my favorite groups out of the comp. hierarchy... If any MSFN member still uses, even if just rarely, usenet news, please do tell us about it... I'm really curious about it.

In July 31, 2008, Sascha Segan published an article in PC Mag entitled "R.I.P Usenet: 1980-2008". On the next day, John Biggs replied with "Reports of Usenet's Death Are Greatly Exaggerated", but fact is, time seems to have shown Segan was right, hasn't it? So... I'd like to know what you all think about it, from the perspective of nowadays: how far do you think usenet has moved on into the fertilizer business? Or hasn't it, yet?

Let's not waste anyone's time. Do, please, perform a simple experiment so we can find out what's happening: Windows 7 SP1 has official ISOs available for download, so, please do download exactly the same version of the official 7 you do have (so that your official key will work) using the links provided in this thread elsewhere. Then burn it to a DVD and try to install it. If your problems persist, then you do have a problem we can help you with. Please notice that, even if your official Win 7 is pre-SP1, those images I've pointed you to should work all right! Of course, please do let us know how it went, whatever the result, OK?

Sure. I do understand why you you've brought it up. No matter whether ReFS is great, and I actually don't intend dispute that, it's simply not needed. exFAT much less. Why move on to proprietary FSes, when none new is actually needed? Just to shower money onto MS for them to develop their follies? It makes no sense to me, sorry, none at all, actually! Now, fact is: there's NTFS, then there's Ext3 and Ext4. And for non-journaling, there's FAT32 and Ext2. While it sure is good to have alternatives for when those trusty FSes are not enough, I don't think proprietary FSes are the way to go anymore... not now, and much less later on. Just my 2¢, of course!

I have 9879 and Start Menu is not transparent like you. What did u do? This has been discussed on here b4 as bigmuscle said: msfn forum => http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163570-aero-glass-for-win81-rtm-rc3/page-35 msdn.microsoft => http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa969537(v=vs.85).aspx classic shell => http://www.classicshell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2050&view=next ~DP

Welcome to MSFN!

@NoelC: With all due respect: ReFS and exFAT are just two more (of the many) ways MS has of imposing closed-source, undocumented, unnecessary standards, where they aren't really needed at all... *and* to support and promote them is tantamount to supporting and promoting evil things like Metro / Universal UI. Now, creating a free update to the real-mode part of the BOOTMGR to allow the non-EFI version GPT capabilities, OTOH, might be a really worthy project, and maybe even demand not too much time to reach real-word usability.

There is also OPPCOMME, of course, to allow uninstallation of ME's "ununinstallable" components.

Never used any of these myself, but they may solve your problem: slowdown utilities!