bphlpt

You'll find it listed here, with a link to BAD-EXHANDLE, but there is essentially no information there at all. I assume this is the only time you've seen this error? It seems to be a rare one from my quick look around. The only "detail" I found was that "This indicates that the kernel-mode handle table detected an inconsistent handle table entry state." Cheers and Regards

This is the biggest problem with removing a feature by trying to "Lite" an OS in some way, rather than just disabling any feature or service that you do not need or want. Whether you are able to reinstall any removed feature probably depends on exactly what was removed, which tool was used for the removal, and what all has been done with the computer since the removal was done. I'm afraid I don't have any advice on how to reinstall Media Player since I personally do not remove any feature from any OS that I install, but perhaps someone else who has at least tried it will post. I'm sure this is not the first time this has occurred. Cheers and Regards

To my knowledge, unfortunately no, there is nowhere to legally download such an ISO. For both cases you might try finding a disc on eBay or other such sites. Just because the disc you purchase in such a manner comes with its own Key Code, at least it better, there is nothing to stop you from using the Key Code you already have. Cheers and Regards

It probably depends on your true needs. If XPx64 and all your current apps meet your needs for the foreseeable future, then I don't know that you need to be in a hurry to change. I assume we are talking about home use? IIRC, even after extended support was dropped for Win2K, updates continued to be released for some time for the truly critical problems that came up. And it is very likely that anti-malware apps will continue to be updated for XP, and by using them along with a hardware defense mechanism such as a good router, and of course being careful and aware when you are on line and having and using a good backup strategy, you really should be fine for quite a while. Since XP still enjoys such a large market share, there very well might be some third party that steps in with some kind of support program. I have seen rumors of such, but so far they are strictly rumors. And even if XP is not updated much, if at all anymore, the advantage to that is that no new problems will be created. New ones might be "found" but none will be "created". And as the majority of users shift further "upward" to Win7 and beyond, new exploits will be more and more focused in that direction as well. Some folks now say that Win98 is one of the "safest" OS out there since no one bothers to target it anymore. If you feel you need, or want, to make a change, personally, I would suggest making every effort to see if you could get Win7 to run on your system, even if you need to make some hardware changes in order to do so, if you can afford it that is. It would seem likely to "future-proof" you better, since that seems to be a concern. I won't even tease you with suggesting Win8. I wouldn't do that to my worst enemy. But I also do not really see a problem with Vista x64. It seems it would be the easiest change for you and would still give you official support for a while, and would give you a chance to get used to the newer ways that MS does things now, such as NTFS and WinSxS. Yes I know they seem more inefficient and bloated than you are used to, and they are from a hardware perspective. But look at it from a software creation cost perspective. People keep wanting their software to do more and more. In the old days, that meant having to tweak every bit of efficiency out of every byte of code, because, compared to today, memory and disc space were limited, CPU speed was slow, and all of those things were expensive. Now as hardware has improved, your smart phone is faster and has more storage space than desktops of old, and it's even "free", with a 2-year service plan. "Real" computers, ie desktops or laptops, are fast and have vast amounts of memory and storage space, for less money than the old systems cost, especially when you take inflation into account. What has gotten more expensive is what it costs to develop the software, ie manpower costs. And since the memory, disk space and CPU cycles are available, it is cheaper and quicker for the software developer to get more features by writing bloated, inefficient code, than to take the time it would require to write code like they used to write it. Also, some of those "inefficiencies", do provide more features, like the WinSxS folder. It gives you more abilities to uninstall updates that you wouldn't have otherwise, for example. Again, because of the hardware improvements, there is just not the need for the normal user to do the kind of "liting" of their OS as there used to be. Even if any improvements in performance could be measured or even noticed, it just won't make enough of a difference to matter in normal day-to-day use. As an old timer that predates PCs, I remember using the early PCs that used 8" floppies or cassette tapes or even paper tape, and the 1MHz 8-bit CPU ran its OS and apps in a total of 64K bytes of total memory, at most, so it is horrifying to see the amount of memory and disc space that OS and apps take up today. But when I wrote code "back in the day", we would spend days optimizing routines to save 10 bytes and 6 machine cycles because it mattered back then. Now it doesn't. If you choose to try Vista or Win7, I would suggest not trying to "lite" the OS at all at first. In fact I would suggest installing it with every option enabled and live with it a while. Try all the features and options. Absolutely tweak and enhance it however you want, but don't remove or disable anything at first. (This will also ensure the most compatibility with other software and cause less problems with "missing" features or future updates.) Once you have seen what you truly don't need or don't like or doesn't meet your particular needs with your other software or whatever, then you can begin disabling features. Continue to live with it like that for a while so that if you were wrong, then it's easy to re-enable the feature and you're back in business. Only after you are really, really sure you don't need or want something should you even consider removing it, and even then, will it really make a difference? If not, just leave it disabled. Sorry for getting off topic. I know all of these suggestions aren't really appropriate to someone who has used computers for as long as I'm sure you have, but you got me started and it all seemed to be related. heh-heh Anyway, I don't know if anything I said will make any difference to you, but good luck with your decision. Cheers and Regards

From my very limited understanding of WinSxS, regardless of whether the updates are slipstreamed or installed later, files are kept in WinSxS so that they are able to be uninstalled or reinstalled later, or in case they are needed during the install of future updates. MS introduced the ability to clean out some of these "obsolete" files in Win8, which shrinks the WinSxS folder somewhat and they have recently backported that to Win7, but not to Vista AFAIK. Cheers and Regards

In your current case, you started out asking whether anyone was aware of any issues with a few particular aspects of the way that you had in mind of trying to install Vista x64 on a Fat32 system. Bottom line, the answer is "No, no one knows", because no one here has ever even tried to do such a thing, nor are they aware of anyone else that has tried it, and they are only aware of one recorded instance of a successful installation of Vista x86 on Fat32. So there were a few offshoot conversations about why you wanted to do such a thing, which then progressed to doubting that you would be successful. But you had not even asked about that possibility, you had just assumed that it would be possible. Then Trip even went as far as to run some tests, though so far they have been unsuccessful. You have succeeded in stirring up some interest, though, like jaclaz, I'm not sure that there would be any noticeable improvement in operation. I know that you say that you have noticed a difference on some of your XP x64 systems and have read of measurable differences under certain conditions, HDD sizes, etc. But then XP easily runs on Fat32, while above XP, not so much. So if you still have an interest in exploring this option, like dencorso said in post 12, it's probably time for you to "stop talking, and proceed to experimentation", and like him, I also mean that with respect. I know that you mentioned that your plans were to do this next year, but it seems you also now agree that even if it is possible, that it will not be an easy task, so the more time you can devote to experiments the better. If you now feel it is a more difficult task than you are able to attempt, then that's fine as well. If you wish to proceed, I agree with jaclaz that it makes sense to first try to repeat and verify Dietmar's methods. You might even also do an install with Vista x86 on NTFS so you can compare the two and see if you can perceive any noticeable difference in performance between them like you say you can on XP x64. If there is no difference, or the performance or operation on Fat32 is impacted in any detrimental way, then that might also influence whether you want to continue to attempt installing Vista x64 on Fat32. Of course, if your interest in this is more academic or you just want to do it "for fun", or just to prove that it can be done, then take all the time in the world you want to play with this concept. Like you say, I'm sure that at least some of the folks that still use Win98 or Win2K do it merely to be stubborn and thumb their noses at those who said that it couldn't be done, or just enjoy being different. On the other hand, if you want to have a stable, reliable, flexible, day-to-day system, do you really want to be the very first one we know of to run Vista x64 on Fat32, when we also have no evidence that even Vista x86 on Fat32 is reliable long term? You began this thread asking about the WinSxS folder, and then the bootloader was immediately brought into question. And that doesn't even take into account dealing with WU/MU and then actually installing the updates obtained, which I assume you feel is important to do. Nor have I seen it even mentioned about whether all of the apps you want to run will all work correctly. Sure, they all "should", but then you thought getting the OS to run would just be a matter of converting the partition with PartitionMagic. There are bound to be unforeseen "gotcha's". IMO, this just doesn't seem like a smart progression from your stable XP x64. Just a few things to think about. Cheers and Regards

If the solution you referenced works for you, then the current version of WPI should work as well, since that timer code was included since May or so, at least in the supporter version. And since all of those changes will be included in the next public version, due in just a couple of days, you should be good to go. Cheers and Regards

So, in other words, you essentially mean "I told you so"? Cheers and Regards

This actually made the front page of the local paper yesterday, even in the little town I live in. Whatever you might think of Snowden and what he did, he certainly succeeded in raising the awareness of the common man to this kind of thing. Cheers and Regards

If the recovered files from the backup can not be counted on as being a true, accurate, recoverable copy, then why bother even making the backup? I mean can you really know for sure where the errors are occurring? Do you know for sure that the errors are occurring during the recovery stage? Could they be occurring during the backup stage? How can you know? Cheers and Regards

Then try manually adding the key DisableGlassOnBattery and the value of 0. I would guess that it might default to enabled if the key is not there, but that's just a guess. Cheers and Regards

Loved this comment: -------------- Reminds me of this -------------- Cheers and Regards

TMT = TotalMedia Theatre, which seems to have a very good reputation among the various high-end BluRay PC player software. Cheers and Regards

And this is true even for the free Home version, as best as I can tell. Cheers and Regards

It was down much of the last 24 hours for me. Cheers and Regards

Welcome! Cheers and Regards

Donated. Cheers and Regards

I am a little confused. You say you want to get the 2010 redistributable of DirectX 9.0c to work properly, but you also say that the November 2007 version of the DirectX 9.0c might be the last version that will work on the TC1000. If the latter is true, then why do you think that the former is possible? I'm not familiar with the TC1000 or any such system with it's apparent deficiencies, but since you say it runs XP alright my idea was for you to run DXCB which should produce an addon, an installer and an uninstaller. You could then run the uninstaller to remove whatever DirectX remnants are currently on the system, then run the installer and hope for the best. If I remember correctly, when the installer registers the various components such as xactengine3_0.dll, I think it blindly continues on regardless of results so will just skip over components that don't register. I guess it will leave those leftover files, but I don't see that they will do any harm, and if they are really not doing anything I suppose you could remove them. (Even though I wrote DXCB, I'm afraid I don't know enough about the actual workings of DirectX to know what the consequences would be of either leaving or removing them.) As I said above, if everything works with the installer you make yourself, if you rerun the MS DirectX installer after using the one you made yourself, the MS installer should indicate that everything is already installed correctly so it will do nothing else. By the way, once you read all the instructions, you will see that if you end up needing to install an older version of DirectX that you have already downloaded, like the November 2007 version, DXCB will allow you to create an installer or addon from the redistributable that you already downloaded. You'll just need to tell it where the redistributable is and to not download a new copy. I guess you'll just have to try it and see. Remember, you can always re-run the uninstaller anytime you need to start over. Good luck. EDIT: You might also want to look here for someone else's experience of using some DirectX DLLs that weren't fully installed. That was on Win2K, but the same might apply in your case. Cheers and Regards

Try again. Worked for me just now. Cheers and Regards

Google --- How To Remove Your Windows XP Password --- for an article by Tim Fisher, probably the first result. In your case you will need to look down at the bottom in the Tips section for the case where "... you want to remove your Windows XP password because you've forgotten it and can no longer access Windows XP ..." I personally haven't had to try it, but it looks like that might help you. Cheers and Regards

Congrats, roirraWedorehT! And I echo your "Happy Thanksgiving" to all in the US. Cheers and Regards

So let me get this straight. You don't mind that Adobe runs a scheduled task every hour, and you don't mind that Adobe calls home once a day. You just don't like the Flash Update flashing the svchost.exe window? Well, jaclaz really did give you a valid solution in both of his posts, just like in the classic joke: Patient: Doc, it hurts when I do this. Doc: Then don't do that! (pause for groans from audience) Seriously, I think many folks, including me, would rather not have Adobe that active, but would rather control those actions with their own timing, even if that means being a couple of days late in getting an update, hence jaclaz's suggestions would not be considered band-aids by them. But that is my opinion. For many others, like your mother or grandfather, it is much much better that updates are always automatic, so I can see the value of either approach. For clarification, do you mind the flash at all, or just when it "hangs"? Since I have never seen the "flash", (I don't know if being on Win7 is a factor), do you mean a cmd window that opens? I guess it might be helpful if you were able to catch a screenshot when it hangs. I understand it's very intermittent, but I'm just saying... Cheers and Regards

Read this thread. Cheers and Regards

Well, since you asked so nicely, here you go. Cheers and Regarads

Not of that particular one that I referenced above, that's only for Chrome, but you can probably find one, and one for Firefox as well. I'm not going to bother looking because I don't have any desire to use IE for anything that I don't absolutely have to. Sorry. Cheers and Regards