CharlotteTheHarlot

Has it been determined if the tracking includes all setups or just for installs of Metro apps from the Windows store? The reporting has been all over the place (i.e., "Windows reports all programs you install back to Microsoft"). Back upthread in a discussion of the telemetry we saw evidence that they can somehow discern individual application usage of Microsoft vs 3rd party programs.

If your calculations are correct, this would also mean Windows 9 won't even come out! ... and Windows 10 will only exist in a negative universe!

There was a First Impressions thread? Shoot, I missed it. Off-topic, but for a good laugh ... Steven Sinofsky caught reading the "Deeper Impressions" thread at MSFN! ( NeoWin ) okay, I made up the title!

Very serious matters. Well if I were Samsung, I'd raise the cash for that billion dollar fine by re-pricing the parts they produce for Apple. Let Apple pay themselves. I don't know, I find it all very troubling. First we have both Jobs and then Ballmer on record spouting maniacal hatred at Google who they see as an upstart stepping onto their turf (arrogant monopolists!). Then we find out about a long-standing secret non-aggression pact between Microsoft and Apple (instead of planning on dividing Poland are they dividing the entire world?). Now we see another crazy court case go in Apple's favor. And somewhere today there was a story of a Microsoft executive gloating about the verdict saying it will help the WP. My own feeling is that there is collusion going on. They both better watch it too, governments are never more trigger happy than when they need money, and they all REALLY need money these days. Microsoft and Apple sure look they are throwing their weight around. If, or when they fall it ain't gonna be pretty. P.S. The Surface vs Concerto is an amazing comparison, and fits right in to the recycle paradigm. We're really gonna have to pull all these comparisons together. What a great find How did you stumble upon it? I can't remember ever seeing that Compaq. jaclaz EDIT: typos

It's a hybrid ... - DPMI-loader / DJ Delorie - Common Object File Format - (Intel 80386) - DJGPP -----------------------------MZ-EXE DOS executable----------------------------- --sizes: header 28, relocs 0, empty 484, image 1536, overlay 1172480 bytes -- --memory: 0027/FFFF,SS:SP=0000:0760,CS:IP=0000:0054,relocs:0 -- --dos/exe.compiler GNU C / go32stub 2.02 // DJ Delorie -- ------------------------------------overlay------------------------------------ --data unix-style COFF executable -- --raw offset: 00000800, size: 1172480 bytes -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wikipedia :: DJGPP ... To mateczko, one thing I noticed is that the DBZ-ME2.exe at 442,996 bytes is UPX packed. When you unpack it the size will be 1,174,528 bytes. This shouldn't matter except for when you have a really slow processor or maybe some combination with a DosBox or a VM. You might try unpacking the EXE and running it that way, it certainly can't hurt. Do you know how to unpack it? I'll attach it here in a RAR, just let me know when you download it so I can delete it (uses up most of quota). EDIT: removed attachment

( Note: some of these ideas I suggested to someone else with a laptop in this thread. Also, you really should spell out all your hardware beforehand, Laptop make/model, HDD make/model, SSD or normal SATA, etc. I originally missed but now see where you said: "my other laptop". It can really save someone from a lot of typing for nothing ) Since it's a laptop you might have manufacturer diagnostics available as a download or already in place on a hidden partition available at reboot through function keys. Verify that there isn't a newer BIOS available from the laptop maker. Laptop motherboard problems are a PITA because you cannot even look for obvious damage (bad caps, loose connectors, dust, etc) without major disassembly. Heat MUST be ruled out as a problem, and the best way I know is to remove all the bottom covers you can, clean it thoroughly with compressed air (including the side vents) and then run the laptop sitting on a powerful cooler). This is best done right after you notice strange problems so that you can see if there is sudden improvement from the increased airflow. Memory is also a major PITA because to this very day the manufacturers haven't created a quick and reliable method to verify that their products are free from defects! It is still a matter of using Memtest and Microsoft's WMD, and hoping that you do not get a false negative. Believe it or not it is more sensible to try 2 different sets of memory in the computer and use the 2-out-of-3 wins rule (if 2 other sets of RAM has no errors in the computer assume the original RAM is bad, if 2 other sets of RAM is also bad in the computer, assume the motherboard or other hardware is bad and that the original RAM is likely ok). Of course you need extra sets of RAM (that you know is good) available to even begin this test. Focusing on the HDD again, one possibility is to pull the hard drive and test it in another good desktop computer via an adapter (2.5" to SATA), using both manufacturer HDD diags and Windows tools (including CHKDSK again). Doing this in another computer will confine the test tto only the HDD and rule out laptop motherboard/controller issues. As above, a spare HDD or two is also a nice thing to have because it would allow you to drop in a known good one and see if the same errors occur which would practically confirm the laptop as defective and not the disk. Increase the probability further by again using the 2-out-of-3 wins rule (if 2 other HDD's have no errors in the laptop assume the original HDD is bad, if 2 other HDD's also have problems in the laptop, assume the motherboard or other hardware is bad and that the original HDD is likely ok). Of course you would have to have spares available, and each independent test costs you more time. The problem with testing only one other disk (or set of RAM) is that we are then allowing a 50/50 coin toss to determine the outcome. BTW, the word "healthy" in most contexts does not mean the hardware is necessarily okay. It usually just means that at that particular point in time the file system and/or S.M.A.R.T. counters are working within their boundaries. It is often seen in disk management in Windows and also in all the SMART utilities. But I see no reason yet to take either of them too seriously. I think they are only useful for flagging errors (a false positive is unlikely but always worth investigating). In other words, if disk management and/or SMART says there is a problem, they are probably correct and now you should run real diagnostics. However, if disk management and/or SMART says "healthy", they MIGHT be correct, but they might not be. This is pretty much true for all such pronouncements in Windows device manager, "This device is working properly." is not something worth betting on. ( In general this is all about avoiding false negatives. You get exposed to some deadly virus. The blood test comes back negative. I would want at least a 2nd independent test to come back negative before I'll sleep easy again. ) P.S. I believe CHKDSK /r is all you need because the /f is redundant.

jaclaz You pretty much owe me a whole room of new monitors and keyboards now!

Certainly anything is possible. Have you mentioned the source of the WHS 2011 backup image? If it is homegrown you have to ask yourself if there is any chance that you backed up an infected or compromised installation. Only you can answer that. If it is an OEM image it is possible but unlikely that they distributed a virus. I seem to remember Compaq or IBM doing this on their recovery discs at least once back in the Win9x or WinXP era. I suspect that nowadays it would be noticed quickly and customers notified and it would be news all over the net. But yes, it is possible to preserve malware in a backup only to have it reappear later. You really first have to rule out the hardware as a problem before wondering about a bad ISO, backup or malware or other software setting. You said "windows found some corrupt file errors and corrected them with check disk", which 99% of the time indicates a physical problem with either the hard disk or less likely the NTFS metafiles. It is possible that a virus changed part of the boot sector but this wouldn't be a show-stopper because you can easily restore the MBR from the recovery console. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I am not aware of any version of Windows picking this up (rewritten MBR) and then going to CHKDSK. This sounds more like a HDD problem. Anyway, you should definitely schedule a full CHKDSK ( see options ) which depending on disk size could take a long time. Later run the specific HDD manufacturer bootup diagnostics on that disk. Hopefully you have at least one more working computer (desktop) available. The HDD could be placed in another computer as a 'slave' auxiliary disk and tested from there because this would eliminate a corrupt BIOS or incorrect setting as a possibility (RAID/IDE/AHCI or bad autodetect or failing battery or defective CMOS). But if another different HDD worked in this 'bad' computer without any errors that would likely rule a BIOS problem out. I think CHKDSK /r will get you started, add the volume if there is more than one. But also locate and burn the diagnostics for that HDD onto a bootable media. It pays to be extremely thorough with debugging hardware problems because later on they will be masked by the OS or other software, driving the user to madness changing various Windows settings for nothing.

I too wonder about SP2. If Windows 8 and Metro defies the expectations and takes off I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck Windows 7 in an early grave. However, two obvious things contradict that. It is cheaper to roll up all the updates into a single service pack from their point of view considering the time it takes to hit the servers one file at a time again and again. And the other thing is that they have support planned for at least ten years, so unless they dramatically alter their public statements and commitments all signs point to SP2 and even SP3. Far more likely is that there won't be any physical media for SP3 and maybe SP2 except from OEM's still selling machines, but it again hinges mightily on the success or failure of Windows 8 and Metro. Common sense would suggest that Microsoft would happily keep important operating systems up-to-date as it is in everybody's interest for a stable computing universe. They followed common sense back in the NT4 and Win2K days but have been back-peddaling with each successive release it seems. And with more than a few strange decisions and careless mistakes emanating from the halls of Redmond lately, I'd say it is a coin toss if they get this one right.

For some reason I find this story funny. As everyone probably knows by now, yesterday it was announced that Microsoft started using a new logo, for the first time in 25 years. It is news on many many sites. Here is the logo as displayed on The Official Microsoft Blog where they have a synopsis explaining this 'new' logo (but leaving out an important detail) ... Everything is all peachy, and then a funny thing happened (and props go to NeoWin for running this story down) causing a bit more egg on Microsoft's face for yet another 'fib' or 'lie' or 'oversight" (you decide) similar to the Metro was a 'codename' controversy. Here is how it went down. First the news gets posted at NeoWin that Microsoft changed it's logo ... Microsoft updates its logo for the first time in 25 years ( NeoWin 2012-08-23 ) Some of the true believers of course are excited and breathless at this 'needed' change, with comments like: "Looks good, simple and fresh. Good job, MS!" and "I love it!" and "love the new logo i feel its like its a heart with four major sections that beat life into our lives <3" and "I like the new logo, Simple and elegant.", etc. Until one commenter recognizes it from the Windows 95 era. NeoBond (the site founder) to his great credit locates the pertinent info and starts another thread four hours later detailing this graphic recycling and breaking the bad news to the heartbroken fanboys that their modern logo isn't so modern ... Microsoft's logo is not new, it's from 1995 [update] ( NeoWin 2012-08-23 ) Lots of "oops" and similar comments in that thread which has taken a decidedly uglier turn with lots of sniping and anger since they inadvertently stepped into it by first praising the bold logo change and then being told it was from Windows 95! Favorite comment there is: "Hahaha this made my day! All those Windows fanboys acting sour when people said things along the lines "The 90s called, they want their interface/design/graphics/etc. back". Now we finally have proof it's actually the truth! LOL!". Earlier in this very thread at MSFN I suggested a Mojave'nix Experiment where the coffee tasters Windows 8 testers are given a copy of Ubuntu and ... well you know what could happen. 'Wow!', 'breathtaking', 'groundbreaking!', 'modern'. Trust me, the true believers wouldn't notice if Microsoft re-released Windows 3.1 at this point. As long as it plays Cut The Rope and does Facebook they'll be fine. Anyway, here is the YouTube of the Windows 95 commercial (can't say I remember it myself). Please note the monologue, it is very ironic ("It used to be difficult for personal computers to do do more than one thing at a time ...") ... So NeoWin asks Microsoft about this controversy and adds their 'answer' ... Since the official blog completely fails to mention its origins in Windows 95 from a television commercial it is safe to say they didn't even know that they were recycling. They were again caught flat-footed. I'm not sure what's going on up there in Redmond. How do you continually make mistakes, big and small like the Metro 'codename' and this, and expect anyone to believe that they are not rudderless and adrift. Perhaps there is a lot more truth than rumor in that Vanity Fair article after all? Microsoft Windows 8 : ReImagination! ( You caught us, We really meant Recycling. ) EDIT: updated image URL, and again

Seriously though, what is the world coming too. Apple with "i" and Microsoft with "e". Does IBM get to use capital "I" as a prefix? Did Microsoft reserve an "m"? Speaking of trademark issues, Dvorak finally weighs in on the whole 'Metro' fiasco ... Metro: That's Not My Name! ( PC Magazine 2012-08-21 ) And he also lets loose on the Surface tablets strategy ... Microsoft Goes Off Half-Cocked ( PC Magazine 2012-08-22 ) As you can imagine, the fanboys and true-believers are losing their minds over his opinions and making fools of themselves in the comments. They are so blinded by hate, rage and jealousy at both Google and Apple that they really should get blood pressure medication. To be honest, I have never seen things in technology, specifically with personal computers and Windows, so polarized and divisive. It is becoming like politics and religion to be sure. We say 'we want choices', Microsoft says 'screw you and your choices', the fanboys say 'stop your whining'. One thing they fail to understand, Microsoft and its fanboys, is the amount of ill-will that is percolating. I mean I can't really decide at this point which company to despise the most: Microsoft, Apple or Google. EDIT: typos Microsoft Windows 8 : We are the Borg! ( You will be Assimilated )

This completely clears the key and then rewrites it ... [-HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "This will run 1st"="Calc.exe" "This will run 2nd"="Notepad.exe" "This will run 3rd"="Mspaint.exe" "This will run 4th"="Wordpad.exe" But that wipes out any other things in there as well so it pays to export the key first to check if there are other things to also restore. This method just deletes the known items and re-enters them (in new, later 'slots') ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "This will run 1st"=- "This will run 2nd"=- "This will run 3rd"=- "This will run 4th"=- "This will run 1st"="Calc.exe" "This will run 2nd"="Notepad.exe" "This will run 3rd"="Mspaint.exe" "This will run 4th"="Wordpad.exe" The key to understanding is that for sequential operations it can be looked at as a FIFO stack like submix8c stated (keeping the analogy simple without PUSH, POP and stack pointer manipulation). First-In, First-Out, enumeration sums it up. You can rename the values (rename a 'slot' without disturbing its location), but only from the REGEDIT GUI. I don't know of any programmatic way, certainly there is none through REGEDIT scripting, but there might be using some commandline tool. Someone else might know.

One way to reverse the execution order without deleting anything would be like this. Assume this exists ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "1"="Calc.exe" "2"="Notepad.exe" ... and then we run ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "1"="Notepad.exe" "2"="Calc.exe" We have reversed the order of execution of the programs even though all we really did was rewrite the values within "1" and "2". Those two slots still lie in the same position within the registry, "1" is before "2", but only what is in those fields is what was changed. A better illustration. Assume the RUN key is empty and we just reserve several sequential locations ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "This will run 1st"="" "This will run 2nd"="" "This will run 3rd"="" "This will run 4th"="" Even though the data fields are empty (value not set), these sequential slots exist and will be enumerated and executed in order (but nothing will happen). Now we just place whatever we like in them ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "This will run 1st"="Calc.exe" "This will run 2nd"="Notepad.exe" "This will run 3rd"="Mspaint.exe" "This will run 4th"="Wordpad.exe" All we did was punch-in some data into the reserved (empty) locations without changing the structure. And we can 're-arrange' the values at anytime, again without actually tampering with the order of the physical 'slots' in the registry structures ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "This will run 1st"="Mspaint.exe" "This will run 2nd"="Wordpad.exe" "This will run 3rd"="Notepad.exe" "This will run 4th"="Calc.exe" Although we are just playing with mere bytes in size here, on a larger scale this can be very advantageous because deleting things in the registry will inevitably cause 'holes' to be created necessitating a quasi-defrag later. The holes can add up and (potentially be a problem on Win9x because of the limitations of large registries in certain circumstances. On Win9x I always used RegCompact and there is NTRegOpt available for NT systems (although it's need is certainly debatable ). EDIT: typo

Microsoft: Fresh Paint is the "#1" Windows 8 Entertainment app ( NeoWin 2012-08-22 ) Microsoft Reimagines Paint ( Technet Blogs 2012-08-22 ) Groundbreaking originality from Redmond! They better hope Disney doesn't see this. And if they do notice the possible 'look and feel' issue Microsoft had better hope their lawyers do a better job than they did with the Metro fiasco. Disney takes anti-piracy very seriously. The kids absolutely loved Magic Artist Studio, which has many amazing special effects. Those Disney characters in the screenshot are actually animated, and it doesn't begin to demonstrate the quality of that Disney program. In many ways it is practically a trainer for complex graphic design, the paint and crayons are just the tip of the iceberg. Interestingly enough, Microsoft once threatened a lawsuit over the letter "E" ( NeoWin 2012-08-22 ) ... EDIT: added a link, typos, updated image URLs Microsoft Windows 8 : ReImagining The Future ( By Stealing from the Past )

Running Opera (or any other browser) was a good debug step, because you quickly isolated the infection vector as MSIE (big surprise). Most n00bs will just fire up MSIE again, hit Google, try a bunch of solutions, and then wonder why it didn't work. This not unusual. Running the antivirus/malware from a live infected machine is practically doomed to fail unless drastic measures are taken, a careful clean bootup without anything except essential services running. This is almost possible with MSCONFIG, but not 100% because a rootkit or really aggressive virus will modify files (despite Windows File Protection) that are loaded at startup even under a clean boot. It depends now how much time you want to spend at this. Most people do not care to learn about every little detail, what time it occurred, which files were installed and modified, what startup points are compromised. Such people would reinstall Windows to be done with it. Considering that two primary vectors are vital to success - physical files (which might have been altered or replaced), and the registry (usually containing hooks to load malware), being able to correct problems in these two places without active countermeasures preventing or undoing your work is critical! Consequently, there are only two real ways to clean an infected Windows installation by accessing the infected installation while it is offline (not booted up) ... (1) - 3rd party bootup disc that loads its own operating system (bypassing the infected machine completely) and has the correct tools to access and clean NTFS volumes, and most importantly, tools to be able to read and write to the offline registry. Making sure that the disc tool can handle rootkits and "Windows XP+" usually means it is appropriate for the job as it implies it has the necessary tools. Such programs will often prompt you to connect to the iinternet first in order to update the tools on the disc (probably old) to the latest definitions (kept in memory for the session). As is always the case, be sure to select 'ALL FILES' when choosing what to scan. That means each and every file, not just programs. If you are a developer and a member of MSDN/Technet you have access to Microsoft's excellent DaRT images to create a bootable disc with the environment necessary to do all these functions (except a proper virus scan) including registry editing, accessing any file, modifying autorun programs, etc. But you cannot use DaRT for commercial purposes or even on other people's computers. Read Microsoft's licensing for the particulars. If you have no access to DaRT then you need 3rd party tools, period. VERY IMPORTANT: having used many of the discs (supplied as burnable ISO's from antivirus companies) you must understand that most of them use custom Linux setups and almost every single one make a very serious error: they have a timer on the bootup screen that asks "boot from disc, or hdd, or whatever?" and the default will boot the infected computer even ignoring BIOS settings that removed that HDD from the bootup process! The user MUST be attentive when using these discs, read the prompts quickly and press whatever key within the time period. (the authors of such insane routines on these discs should be waterboarded, but I digress ...). Now having said that, this method can definitely be successful with great care and by doing it several times with different discs. It is more time consuming than (2) because the optical drive becomes a bottleneck at initialization, though once the files are loaded into memory or a ramdisk it is largely ignored. (2) - Placing the hard disk containing the infected installation into another computer (as a slave/auxillary hard disk) and then bootup up that other computer and then using an array of tools specifically targeting that infected hard disk. The "other" computer is best setup as a forensic/diagnostic unit, updated with the latest utilities and antivirus definitions. When doing the physical antivirus file scan, like above, be sure to select 'ALL FILES' when choosing what to scan. That means each and every file, not just programs. It helps to manually delete pagefile.sys from the root folder of the target beforehand since it is a large file that will be re-created later. I also make a point of manually locating and emptying all the various TEMP folders on the target disk. One thing that needs special treatment is the now offline registry on the target hard disk. You will need to learn how to use an Offline NT registry tool for some cases. But for most cases you can get away with just firing up AUTORUNS and selecting the offline system. - Some people consider remote access through networking as a third method, but I don't because as long as the infected installation is booted up the infection could be deploying countermeasures to thwart the scanning and cleaning process. Remember that the goal is simple, NO infected files, and NO registry startup locations that loads or downloads something evil. Achieving these two goals will now allow a safe bootup on the formerly 'bad' system. Now you can than update MBAM (Malware Bytes) and MSE (Security Essentials) or whatever other one you use and run them again live, looking for stragglers (legacy vectors such as links placed in startup folders and edits to WIN.INI, and registry substitutions swapping one application for another). In summary, if you only have this one infected computer, you must go elsewhere and have someone download and burn the bootup CD's, or pull the hard drive and hand to someone competent. This is why so many opt to re-install Windows. And, this is why many who don't will often be re-infected again and again. EDIT: typo

Long story short, during bootup that registry key will be read sequentially. The items will be executed in the order that they physically exist within the registry database. That physical order is determined by the sequence they were entered in the registry. The order that you see while looking at the RUN key through the REGEDIT GUI is only cosmetic (notice that there are sortable columns there in the GUI also). If you want to learn the true physical order that they are stored (and thus will be executed) you will want to export the RUN key and look at in a text editor. For example, let's say you have an empty RUN key and import the following (as you are no doubt aware, REGEDIT4 precedes these commands, they're left out for brevity) ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "1"="Calc.exe" "2"="Notepad.exe" Not surprisingly, REGEDIT will show that exact order in its Window, and if you export that key the listing will show that order as well. If you restart the computer you will have a CALC and then a NOTEPAD window pop open in that order left to right. Now let's clear those two with a script (you can just delete them manually in the GUI if you want) ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "1"=- "2"=- ... And now re-enter them in opposite order ... [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run] "2"="Notepad.exe" "1"="Calc.exe" Now REGEDIT will not show that order (it will look exactly like the first one above), but if you export that key the listing will show the correct order with "2" preceding "1". If you restart the computer you will have a NOTEPAD and then a CALC window pop open in that order left to right. The numerical prefixes used as the data value names are not considered when the key is accessed and sequentially read during system startup. Long story longer, they are using enumeration functions that access registry keys and values without referencing the 'names' first. They essentially map out the items until there are 'NO MORE' and then go back and run them in the order they were enumerated. Many critical Windows registry keys are read this way during bootup. The reason is because many (perhaps most) applications, drivers and services need to be ordered as they often depend on something already being executed before they can work. Think of it as being similar to the way the old AUTOEXEC.BAT or CONFIG.SYS order mattered (and boy did it matter!). So, when a key or value is used in this manner, the 'name' doesn't matter at all and instead of "1" or "2" we could have named them anything we wanted to. Note: clearing those values first is very important if you are testing this. When an item is entered into the registry, a 'slot' is created and used. The next item gets a later 'slot'. The order these slots are created is what gets picked up during enumeration. If we didn't clear those two slots and ran the 2nd script after immediately the 1st, what would have happened is that the values using the names "1" and "2" would merely have been refreshed (overwritten with the exact same data, first the "2", then the "1", but the slots would still be in the same position as "1" and then "2"). This applies to both Win9x and NT since we are talking about standard Windows API registry functions. EDIT: made it prettier

Windows 8 Pro to be priced at $199 following $69.99 promotional pricing ( The Verge - 2012-08-21 ) If this proves to be true, it looks like the final nail in the coffin for Windows 8. There would be really no doubt that Microsoft management is completely unrealistic and beyond redemption. IMHO, Even Windows XP and 7 were way over-priced, and should have sold for about 50% of the retail sticker. But $200 for this steaming pile is just plain wrong. Come next February when the promos end and the prices return to normal, you can stick a fork in this thing, it's done. Microsoft Window 8 : We used to call it Windows, but why bother? ( No-one needs more than two snapped apps. )

tomasz86, see the post above yours (I think we posted at the same time!). His hosting site is okay, apparently they just gave him the standard web URL that shows the desired picture but also has some advertising and disclaimers. From there I pulled out the actual image URLs and included them above so he can edit them if he wishes. EDIT: Ah I see now, they are using dynamic URLs at the hosting site within the original URL page. God I hate that. To hoak, tomasz86 is exactly right, you need to dump them. Photobucket still works okay, as does imgur and others. P.S. Sorry for cluttering up the thread Tihiy!

To hoak, I'll try to get them to display here in this comment. It looks like that hosting site is another that doesn't like embedding. Here are the URL's of your three linked images ... http://s15.postimage.org/tloh2z3ll/screen739.jpg http://s15.postimage.org/uch78r5yx/333454_windows_8_start_button.jpg http://s16.postimage.org/79knmbdk3/bothp.jpg When embedded using those URL's (given by the hosting site I presume) they will not show. But if you open them up each individually and then copy image address (in Opera) you will find these different URL's ... http://s15.postimage.org/67ghr1lo9/screen739.jpg http://s15.postimage.org/verdraos9/333454_windows_8_start_button.jpg http://s16.postimage.org/omuy168v7/bothp.jpg Here I will embed those new URL's ... Nice pics. hoak, If you want to edit your post and change the URL's then I will delete them from here. Just let me know. NOTE: don't copy/paste the displayed text of the URL you see above because it uses ellipsis (...), instead, right-click 'copy link address' to get them.

Can anyone else see those images? The links are good when posted directly into the Address Bar, but they appear as empty boxes with the ALT text "POSTED IMAGE". Weird. EDIT: I am referring to the post #108 just above this one.

[emphasis added] Analogies are seldom perfect, but here we go: Maybe Windows 7 will take on the role of Windows 98 as the last in its particular branch of development, with Win8 becoming the new ME in the role of getting the computing public used to Microsoft's chosen future way of doing things (recall that ME, though still built on DOS, made it impossible to exit Windows into DOS). However, whether the computing public will take as well to the successor to the transitional Win8 as it did to Windows XP (the chronological successor to the transitional ME), cannot be foretold at this juncture. (I do know about Windows 2000, but remember -- that OS was really intended for a business/professional market rather than the public at large, which is what I'm talking about here.) And so, in 2025 or thereabouts some of us might be found here on MSFN working on the newest Unofficial Service Packs for Win7. Unquestionably true. I don't know if they are presently going whole hog into the Applesque Metro/RT store model just yet. Perhaps they are just getting their feet wet and to measure how much fuss is made. Nevertheless, they see every single independent author out there as a scab. They see them the way that billg saw Netscape and how Ballmer sees Google. They want to turn the desktop into a legacy CMD window that is buried in a pile of colorful tiles. Moving "forward" they want to funnel everything through the store. They'll say it is better for "security". They'll say it is "better for the children" (maybe billg will finally be awarded his nobel). Should they not receive a lot of blowback, the plan gets accelerated. With some blowback they simply slow down and say that they have learned their lesson and are listening (again) like with Vista. Slow cooking frogs. IMHO, the best outcome for everyone (except Microsoft) is that Windows 8 crashes and burns. Actually, more needs to be done than that, but it would be a good start. Having benefited (like everyone else) from a standard OS on most of the world's PC's it pains me to believe I was wrong, but I was wrong. That monopoly was justified by many (me included) as being compared to having a common spoken or written language - 'you can't get anything done if there is no standard'. Perhaps it was necessary, but then this happens, they are outright planing on abusing that monopoly and converting it into their own private little Apple store. Well, this is what people should be angry about. This is the logical progression of a near 100% monopoly. It is positively Machiavellian. Somewhat related ... How Microsoft Lost Its Mojo: Steve Ballmer and Corporate America’s Most Spectacular Decline That Vanity Fair story has gotten a lot of press, the fanboys are having strokes. Fun read though. Metrosoft Windows 8 : Stop calling it Metro! ( It was just a codename. Really. )

My own opinion is that Microsoft had planned a side business of providing replacement media. Official avenue to get media ... How to Replace Lost, Broken, or Missing Microsoft Software or Hardware Hasn't worked out according to plan really. I believe they simply missed the boat here, being a lumbering behemoth and all. In other words they could have easily used the internet infrastructure to fill the needs of people by posting an ISO (refreshed with each SP). Much of a Windows CD/DVD is found in the large service packs anyway, their sizes are usually more than one half the size of the distribution disc. And, since they went to activation there is really no excuse for the runaround. But it is what it is. There are no fully legal methods for most people to get what you mentioned except for that link. And when you consider how bad Microsoft wants to kill WinXP, it's a miracle that any avenues exist at all. Keeping in mind that Microsoft support is not completely averse to asking "can you borrow a friend's disc?" (stated in various other forum comments) but stopping short of suggesting to "find an ISO and burn it", we can assume there are several tiers of legality in their minds. But one thing is absolutely for sure, the legality of obtaining an ISO outside of official avenues is a completely separate issue to the rules here (a completely clean and exceptionally well moderated forum) so some things are just better left unsaid! IMHO, it is better for people to go to SevenForums and MDL and do their own research and then, take their own risks.

Unfortunately the published specifications (see my previous post) do not list any normal Core2 Quads in the compatibility. However for some reason it does list Core2 Extreme which I believe most were quads (and they were all heaters that could warm your house too so it can't be TDW limits). It does seem odd but maybe it has to do with the i865 Northbridge? I don't know. I glanced at the comments on the NewEgg page and didn't see any obvious mention about regular Core2 Quads.

All in all it looks like a great Win9x board. i865g is a very stable chipset and the integrated graphics are adequate for anything except games. Buying new DDR-1 memory these days is a little expensive in my experience but even that is still possible but at double or triple the DDR-2 and DDR-3 prices. From the Specifications ... CPU ... LGA 775 for Intel® ... - Dual-Core - Core™ 2 Extreme - Core™ 2 Duo - Pentium® D - Pentium® 4 - Celeron® D Those two bolded CPU's are probably of most interest to someone only planning to using Win9x. Both of them shipped with up to 3.8 GHz stock. The Extreme Editions got around 3.7 GHz if I remember correctly, but those are still expensive even buying used on eBay. Unique Feature ... - ASRock APP Charger - Hybrid Booster: - CPU Frequency Stepless Control - ASRock U-COP - Boot Failure Guard (B.F.G.) With some very mild overclocking one can easily get 4 GHz out of one of those CPU's. This could be the choice speed demon board for Win9x.

You can always put the disk back in and run the bootable CD diags (link is in my previous post) and/or continue pursuing the Windows misconfiguration. Alternatively if you have the means, using an adapter (2.5" to SATA) you can connect that disk to another computer as an auxillary drive and run a full battery of tests (bootable CD HDD diags or Windows based utilities). You shouldn't be bothered by not determining the root cause because when you did the full install of Windows to a new HDD you effectively performed two solutions at once, consequently neither the hardware (failing HDD) or software (OS or other) can be pinpointed.