dencorso

Supposedly the Windows Product Key Update Tool might be able to change any type of licence to a Get Genuine Kit licence (which I think is of generic OEM type). Did you actually give it a try?

Did the problem manifest itself in Win98SE, despite the presence of the patches listed in the quote below? @jds: While not mandatory, I usually add the Unofficial Win 9x Stack Corruption, 98KRNLUP, which installs Krnl386.exe v. 04.10.00.2000, to the mix, too. This completes the available updates to Win 9x core files. Also how do FCIV.EXE and CRC.EXE behave, both on 98SE and pure DOS, with your problem file?

In principle, yes. You may want to run a chkdsk X: /r (where X: is the assigned drive letter), from the MS-DOS box (a.k.a. command prompt window), just in case. And since the disk is huge, it may be a long time before it finishes, don't worry. My FreeAgent Go fell from the table onto the carpet last week (some 3 ft) and remained OK, according to chkdsk. But if anything had happened, chkdsk would've found it (and fixed it, most of the time).

Great! Now we know how to do the "dumb", sector-by-sector image. So the experiment was a huge success. But, for general use, we may use compression, now that we're sure of the other parameters. So, let's try it one last time, with the same settings, except for maximum compression (it's not clear whether the exclusion of any type of files will work on a sector-by-sector image... it shouldn't, because the contents of the sectors ought not to be interpreted, just saved blindly). Do not delete the 465GB image, however. It's a good one, so only after the compressed version is validated, you may contemplate to do that, OK? BTW, does Black Armor provide any method of browsing the contents of the image? I can search the manual for the answer, but maybe you've found out already, so I'm asking it. If the contents of the sector-by-sector image can be browsed, we can find out many answers on details, just by browsing inside it. But probably it's not possible. Only file-by-file backups can be browsed, usually. But one can always wish...

You're right, deda, but when that happens the battery is almost completely gone. Much before that, there can happen time losses of several minutes, before the point the BIOS will notice. At that point the battery is already not good, but not bad enough for the BIOS to detect it.

That's a complex imaging/backup system, for sure! However, on fist glance, and after some thought, I'd say you should select the following options: Create an image using the sector-by-sector approach Full backup Back up unallocated space Create new backup archive Source files exclusion: exclude nothing. Compression: None. Validate backup archive when it is created Let's see what results do you get from them.

TIME should get it's info from the BIOS, but if you reset the BIOS real-time clock, Windows will know about it, and reset its own. So the only way to find out if the BIOS real-time clock is loosing time is by reseting the clock (either from windows or using TIME, using an external reference, say, your mobile phone), then shutting down and keeping the machine off for at least one day, then turning on and, *immediately* after windows is fully loaded, comparing the time (either from windows or using TIME) with the same external reference used before: if the machine has lost some time, then it's probably the battery, if not, the problem may lie with windows.

Because your CMOS battery is worn out. Just replace it and the problem will go away. Yes. The TIME command behaves like that since 1981 (PC-DOS 1.0). However, you're not forced to update time at all: if you just press enter instead, without imputing a time string, it'll understand you don't want to change the value it just displayed, and it will keep it. Since you haven't had the warning, it follows it *cannot* possibly be the cause of the time loss.

I don't know why. In many situations, my main system being a case-in-point, layout.dll fails to perform a correct layout restore, after it gets messed up. But I've never found one single system where midiox's files don't work, up to now. I've never investigated in full this problem, but the author of the midiox desktop restore (Jamie O'Connell) published some notes about it on his site, for which I gave a link above. There is also a forum dedicated to it, there. And it's freeware!

If you don't "back up unallocated space.", it's not a "dumb" image. Figuring out the right parameters takes some tries. Try once with "back up unallocated space." and no compression, and let's see the size of it.

reanimatolog sort of solved that one back in 2003... Please find attached a CD that boots from a 700MB superfloppy. Its boot sector is a 4 sector no emulation file called bcdwboot.bin. The 2004 version of it is in the v. 1.50Z zip file. The .iso with the 700 MB sfloppy has the 2003 version. BCDW 1.50Z, by reanimatolog, can boot CDs from all sorts of superfloppy images. He also offers some such images here. There's a newer (or less old) version of BCDW,v2.01a, but I've never used this one. I've also attached reanimatolog's files here, since they are freeware and may disappear (the German mirror already is no more). fd700000_iso.zip bcdw150z_en.zip bcdw-2.0a1.zip

Use that thread to discuss new or ongoing issues, report programs that are working and post bug reports. Read the full thread to get the feel of it, if needed be. I'm trying to prevent hijacks there because the thread is already huge. Notice that you've been posting there faster than you're getting replies, and on diverse subjects, all at the same time. Slow down. And open new threads, as needed. For things related to KernelEx, this sub-forum is the right place. But try to avoid opening more than 3 or 4 new threads per week, so as to give people time to think, experiment, and then give you meaningful replies. Nobody here knows it all, and most of what we do know is from first hand experience or from searching (both of which take some time)...

If the image is compressed, the unused space takes very little space. If the image is *not* compressed, it should be the same size of the disk. If it's *not* compressed, and *not* the same size, then it's not "dumb", but "intelligent". If this is the case, then you should look up in the manual for the appropriate settings (or command-line switches) for acquiring the "dumb" image instead. The "intelligent" image already obtained is not useless, but is less reliable than the "dumb" one. And most if not all imaging programs don't do "dumb" images by default, usually requiring some switch or setting to do them. For Ghost, it's "-ir" for the "dumb" image and "-z9" for maximum compression, for example.

+1!

I understand, I did try and PM Dave-H but his message box was full and I was unable to leave him a message, so I thought it was only courteous thing to do was to reply to him, but I take what you say. What part of "don't hijack the KernelEx Sticky Thread" did you not understand, frogman? You've already had created a thread for SuperAntiSpyware! Why not keep to it? Well now your post is moved to the right thread, and the thread in the right subforum.

Great! A full sector-by-sector "dumb" image is good for every possible happenstance. It's, however, long to acquire. An incremental, file-based back-up is good mainly for data, but may be useful for the registry, too, if done properly, and it's fast. Both have their uses. So making "dumb" images monthly or fortnightly, at most, should be enough, if supplemented by an up-to-date incremental backup. And out-of-schedule supplemental "dumb" images may be created at critical moments, such as before a big install or some software addition you want to do just for a short time, before restoring the previous state. That's a very sound strategy, that covers all bases.

I had suggested to image first, then mess things up... That way you'd have some way to fall back to your original (not so good) starting point, as if nothing had happened, whenever you thought things were now worse than before, and felt like starting over. Your famous trepidation about imaging, JorgeA, obviated that failsafe, so now you have no image to fall back to. I cannot stop wondering why people prefer doing things in the least safe way possible (even when things turn out to end well)... even after seeing so many feet shot to oblivion it still doesn't quite enter my mind that such behaviour is part of human nature. And, yes, with the Office Converter Pack (a download only available up to Dec 31st, 2010), followed by theOffice2007 FileFormatConverters Pack one can open and save all older formats, plus all new formats introduced in Office2007 from earlier Office versions (the latter officially from 2k up, but I've found out it works also for Office'97 on Win XP and later, as BlouBul mentioned).

layout.dll is not reliable. Use midiox desktop restore, instead. Works great!

Go to Preference Settings in Opera, ans click on the Advanced tab. Select "Programs". Un-check "Check if Opera is default browser on startup". Click on the "Details" button and it will show what Opera is associated with. Check or un-check the ones that you need, and then run Firefox and make it your default browser. It should then open htm files again, and Opera won't steal them back. Thanks, but I have a funny feeling I had tried that and the bookmark html icon remained as Opera's, even tried changing the icon. I un-ticked the associated files with Opera, but I left the http and https, should I have un-ticked these too? This thread is for discussing KernelEx *only*! Start another thread, if you need, but do stop hijacking this one!

That occurs 99 percent because the PC crashed, the PC was hard powered off or you pressed the case reset button. That is a real problem which plagues both Win 9x/ME and their underlying DOSs. NDD finds it reliably and corrects it flawlessly every time it arises. Such problem happens every time the OS doesn't update one single variable in the FSINFO sector of the partition. That can be due to a crash, but it can equally be due to any minor falure at shutdown (or reboot) time, minor enough to pass otherwise undetected. There's nothing to worry about, as the OS can keep working with that variable incorrect, but fixing it makes the OS faster and sharper.

NO. Be VERY AWARE that Hiren's is WAREZ. @janandababu: You have been warned.

Well... @PuntoMX: I guess you know I use AVG, the paid for version, btw. I fully know most everybody on this forum must think I ought to have my head examined, just for that. Up until AVG 9.0 I'd say they gave you superb support, which was more than worth the fee. Now with AVG 2011 and their outsourced support, I'm begining to think y'all are right and I really ought to have my head examined... @JorgeA: Be as it may, AVG gives one all that you've mentioned, while being much lighter on the system. And they are among those who invented that Safe Surfing site rating scheme, if not the actual inventors of it. This is to say you do have options. This is *N*O*T* to proselytize in favor of AVG.

Wow! Thanks a lot, WildBill, you do rock! BTW, I hadn't compared the QFE and GDR binaries, in this case. But, in fact this may happen, since all MS says about QFE is that they *may* contain additional fixes (however, when they don't, they ought to have the same version number as the corresponding GDR file -- and that usually happens -- but not here)...

Sure, JorgeA. However, since there's no urgency, I think we should postpone my refresher course on Acronis to next month, when things will be less hectic for me. I cannot possibly help you explore the capabilities of it unless I either install it on one of my machines, or, preferebly, create a bootable CD of it and test it, Were it urgent, I'd do it sooner, but that's clearly not the case. That said, I'm OK with your decision. In any case, maybe you should get an inexpensive pendrive (say, a 1 to 4 GiB Kingston or SanDisk, not a no-brand one) so that we may populate it with files, then image it, then format it, then deploy the image freely and without fear of destroying anything of value. Think of it as a test device, just for training purposes. What do you say?

True. But I was thinking of the most thorough compression available, since minutes are not an issue, for an acquisition that can very well take some hours.