Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


jaclaz

Member
  • Content Count

    19,129
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by jaclaz

  1. Some news (not actually good news, still ...) : https://www.win-raid.com/t3802f42-Intel-I-O-drivers-and-Touchpad-in-Windows-Asus-Precision-Touchpad.html The issue with the stupid ELAN touchpad is not confined to the (stupid) Lenovo, ASUS has it as well. Although that issue above has not been solved Fernando (and the other good guys at Win-Raid Forum) seem way ahead of us (or at the very least waaay ahead of me) in the analysis of the problem, so you might want to - after having read the above thread - make a new one over there asking for assistance jaclaz
  2. Can you post a link to the specific ELAN driver you are using? It must be seen how the installer is made, sometimes the installer executable itself contains some commands/Registry settings that are actually needed (or if you prefer, direct installing might anyway lead to *something missing* and fail - in a different way). I'll have a look at the devmanview output and see if I can spot anything jaclaz
  3. At first sight everything looks fine BUT the third and second last images (System devices), it seems like you have some duplications there (but it is absolutely possible that your system actually has that many devices and that it is "normal"). Anyway Device Manager is not the "right" (no offence intended of course) way to list devices when there is this kind of troubles, and seemingly you have not set the "DEVMGR_SHOW_NONPRESENT_DEVICES" environment variable, so it is possible that a "phantom" device (or its driver) is involved in the issue. See: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/315539/device-manager-does-not-display-devices-that-are-not-connected and: https://www.raymond.cc/blog/uninstall-hidden-devices-calling-ghostbuster/ You should IMHO try to re-install (if needed) the AMD and the ELAN drivers (in order to recreate the Code 12 situation), then get the nice Nirsoft DevManView, open it, check in Options that "Show non-plug-n-play devices" is selected, refresh (if needed) then select all devices and File->Save selected items to a tab-delimited text file. Then attach this text file, any willing helping member will be able to load the file in *any* spreadsheet program and order/filter/whatever the results easily. Even if this: https://superuser.com/questions/119236/this-device-cannot-find-enough-free-resources-that-it-can-use-code-12 is seemingly related to different hardware, the "root issue" of a conflict or race condition might be the same or similar. jaclaz
  4. Reading the given thread: https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/Lenovo-IdeaPad-1xx-3xx-5xx-7xx/Ideapad-320-touchpad-not-working/td-p/3771756 it seems like that machine can have both a AMD or an Intel processor/motherboard/chipset and that the drivers provided only work on the Intel version and not on the AMD version? But the post on the page nitroshift provided a link to seems poorly worded, there are three items listed on the post: https://forums.lenovo.com/t5/Lenovo-IdeaPad-1xx-3xx-5xx-7xx/Ideapad-320-touchpad-not-working/m-p/3890012/highlight/true#M50519 You could try the first one (the AMD drivers) AND NOT the last one (which is seemingly Intel only). Maybe there is a conflict right now (because you attempted to install both)? Code 12 should mean that the same resources are used by more than one device. See (only loosely connected, it seems like it is the opposite situation) here: https://www.jodybruchon.com/2012/03/15/code-12-on-windows-7-the-device-cannot-find-enough-free-resources/ jaclaz
  5. Yes, a good IDE is not that much slower than a SATA with "normal" HDD's, of course SSD is another matter. The USB fastish transfer could be probably for another reason, seemingly USB transfer for FAT 16/32 was dumbed down after 2000 (NTFS should be however faster than 2K) JFYI: https://msfn.org/board/topic/125116-fat16-vs-fat32-vs-ntfs-speed-on-usb-stick/ jaclaz
  6. Read this (and links within): https://msfn.org/board/topic/161886-how-best-to-clone-the-c-hdd-w98fe/ Basically: http://www.xxcopy.com/index.htm or: http://www.partition-saving.com/ jaclaz
  7. Not what you asked, but you may try (if you can make an image/backup/etc,) to change the mode post-setup. For XP it is/was possible so the same should be possible on 2000. JFYI: https://msfn.org/board/topic/120444-how-to-install-windows-from-usb-winsetupfromusb-with-gui/?page=40&tab=comments#comment-884409 http://reboot.pro/topic/11729-how-to-load-sata-drivers-to-offline-windows-xp-system/ It is possible that for *some* reasons the "right" driver cannot be integrated/started/whatever in the setup. You could also try (if you want to rinstall) with a (fake/virtual) F6 floppy (via grub4dos), again tested on XP but should work on 2K as well: https://msfn.org/board/topic/154071-f6-without-a-floppy-drive/ jaclaz
  8. Yes, but 2 GB is "queer". Personally I would rather try first to install a XP SP1 and see what amount of RAM it actually sees (with /PAE switch) before going down the path of these kernel patches[1]. Only for the record the PAE access limitation was introduced (arbitrarily) with XP SP2, but there may be other reasons (usually BIOS related) that prevent anyway to see only part of the RAM installed. jaclaz [1] Which - all of them - have been reported as being generally speaking NOT stable, and since the actual (official) reason for the limitation to RAM access with XP SP2: https://web.archive.org/web/20061123232102/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888137 was to remove compatibility problems with third party drivers, I wouldn't want a non-stable, experimental, patch on a system on which drivers are already not functioning or are however hacked/parched/adpated and not fully tested.
  9. Well, I doubt that administrators and lawyers are yet ready for this, your screenshot may be of some GUI Linux runnning in the Linux Subsystem running on Windows 10, sadly . jaclaz
  10. Yep, that's it. Maybe then they are not the "right" drivers. Please try again as in the post https://msfn.org/board/topic/178354-win-7-no-usb-drivers/ But click on the tab "Details" to get the PCI\VEN & DEV. This madness usually happens when there is a (bad/wrong/whatever) driver included in the OS that "prevails" on the new one, but shouldn't happen in your case because you are in Code 28, i.e. no drivers installed. You can still try with pnputil: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/devtest/pnputil-command-syntax https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/devtest/pnputil-examples but before that let's check the actual PCI\VEN & DEV of the "unknown device" jaclaz
  11. Good , though if you can it would be useful to compare those to your friend's ones. The Mass Storage devices seem to me like not relevant (even if the may be part of the mess). What happens if you delete the devices and lt after reboot Windows 7 find them? Or try forcing the instal of these (x86/x64): http://driverpacks.net/catalog-drivers/device_id/hwid-PCI\VEN_8086%26DEV_1E2D?os=windows-7-x86 http://driverpacks.net/catalog-drivers/device_id/hwid-PCI\VEN_8086%26DEV_1E2D?os=windows-7-x64 jaclaz
  12. Hmmm. Try removing all USB related devices (those with the exclamation mark), reboot and see what happens. Along the lines of: http://farmtek.net/win7_driver_fix.htm Check also hidden devices, *like* here: https://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/165554-usb-driver-general-fix-problems.html Personally I would use devcon, instructions here: https://www.robvanderwoude.com/devcon.php actual freely redistributable file (recompiled from the orignal MS source) here: to list all USB related drivers: DEVCON DriverFiles =USB and to list all devices: DEVCON Findall =USB saving the lists to .txt files and compare them against the same files on your friend's system. jaclaz
  13. Not that Gnome classic is in any way pleasant to the eye. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder still, after all these years, I still cringe at the general ugliness and clumsyness of *most* Gnome desktops (*any* version) looks, IMHO KDE is way better. Anyway, most probably the best candidate for an XP->Linux transition is -still IMHO - Zorin OS (Gnome based): https://zorinos.com/ or Netrunner (KDE based): https://www.netrunner.com/ jaclaz
  14. Windows 7 does not have "built-in" USB 3.0 drivers. Depending on the actual chipset they may (or may not) exist for your machine/chipset. In your case you seem like lucky, Looky here: https://pcsupport.lenovo.com/hk/en/products/laptops-and-netbooks/thinkpad-x-series-laptops/thinkpad-x230/downloads/ds034760 jaclaz
  15. See: https://msfn.org/board/topic/176224-wpa2-works-in-windows-2000/ https://msfn.org/board/topic/173922-need-a-wireless-client-for-windows-2000/ https://msfn.org/board/topic/175965-windows-2000-wireless/ https://msfn.org/board/topic/175486-wpa2-for-windows-9x/ jaclaz
  16. Sorry for the bump, but I feel like this piece of news is fine here: https://www.golem.de/news/subdomain-takeover-microsoft-loses-control-over-windows-tiles-1904-140717.html jaclaz
  17. Sure, there is no problem whatever in doing impossible things . The problem is to highly compress the files (in a reasonable time, using reasonable resources), and then to re-expand them obtaining the same as the original (as well in a reasonable time, using reasonable resources) . You can still try KGB: https://web.archive.org/web/20080912112144/http://kgbarchiver.net/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/kgbarchiver/files/ Or go directly to BARF: http://mattmahoney.net/dc/barf.html However nowadays I would try ZCM (which is the successor of Nanozip): http://heartofcomp.altervista.org/Zcm.htm and/or its other "brothers" by Francesco Nania jaclaz
  18. Very likely your computer is one of those that (for some strange reasons) has issues with MBR style devices if the firmware is set to UEFI only (maybe a DELL?) or that (again for strange reasons) doesn't "like" the grub4dos bootcode (Insyde BIOS?). In any case for Windows 10 you would be probably better served by either Rufus: https://rufus.ie/ or WINNTSETUP (but if you choose this latter there is an initial learning curve to create the PE in which to run it): https://msfn.org/board/topic/149612-winntsetup-v3931/ If you want to solve the problem with winsetupfromusb, you may want to try (if you are using a UEFI firmware) to enable the CSM (Comparibility Support Module, in practice BIOS, if you have this option) and/or try to change boot order (nowadays on most computer there are two ways to boot from USB, onechanging the boot order in the firmware and one changing this setting on-the-fly at boot time prssing a hotkey - like F8 or F11/F12 and sometimes oine of the two methods works and the other one doesn't). jaclaz
  19. There are three possibilities (provided that the information you got from the tools you used are correct and that those 4 sectors actually belong to one of the files in that folder): 1) those sectors are actually bad and the copy you made misses them or is corrupted 2) those sectors are intermittently bad and sometimes they are read correctly and sometimes they are not 3) everything is fine and Ghost is having an hiccup of some kind. You don't provide enough information, which actual commands did you run?, what were the actual results? Etc., etc. Technically it wasn't a smart move to "slave" a NT4 NTFS disk (its volumes) to an XP, the filesystem will very likely have been upgraded to a later NTFS version, and some functions on the original NT4 server might not be able to run anymore, see: Anyway, at this point you can use DMDE on the XP: https://dmde.com/ to analyze the NTFS and find which sectors are actually occupied by that file, then you can try to recover that file and/or copy the sectors directly. A CHKDISK /R is the most you can do to "fix" those sectors, if it works, it works, if it doesn't you should IMHO change the disk, using the old one only for experiments. jaclaz
  20. No, it doesn't. You should (could) have added "SAPI5". Some resources/lists: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2062625/microsoft-sam-sapi-alternatives http://www.zero2000.com/free-text-to-speech-natural-voices.html but there are not that many which are actually free AFAIK, a few may be free but for private use only, not commercial. The "new" ones by MS are here, Helen and ZiraPro for en-US: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=27224 MSSpeech_TTS_en-US_Helen.msi MSSpeech_TTS_en-US_ZiraPro.msi Or you could try espeak: http://espeak.sourceforge.net/ (It has some SAPI5 voices) jaclaz
  21. You mean something like: https://freefilesync.org/ jaclaz
  22. Sure, the Windows 9x series (and Me) was targeted to final users/home users, it was far easier to install/setup it was (on same hardware of the time) definitely faster or if you prefer requiring less resources, it was simple, it could run games, etc. NT on the other hand (remember that plug 'n play was introduced only several years later with Windows 2000) was tough to install/configure, it was less "widely compatible" with different hardware, drivers were made only for much more expensive cards, or motherboards, etc., etc., the storage subsystem was typically SCSI (much more expensive) and thus it was only aimed at the professionals/businesses. Up to Windows 2000 they were simply two completely separated "channels", business and home, each with the OS with the features that were more suitable for the intended use. XP broke this separation, by imposing to the pro's unneeded bells and whistles and by imposing to the common users senseless restrictions and or "features" that made (and still make in later NT versions) no sense whatsoever. jaclaz
  23. Intersting and nice. To be picky (as I am BTW ) I would have expected some more attention in writing the instructions for the USB tool: https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/event/H310_windowstool/ I believe there is something just "not right": jaclaz
  24. Mah. I had NT 3.51 running on most of my office machines[1] one month after its release, and surely 13 moths later every machine was running NT 4.0, and another 40 months later or so everything was upgraded to Windows 2000. I am sorry to learn that you wandered for five years on DOS 7, but you weren't actually forced to it, in practice I never used 95 or 98 machines, let alone Me[2][3]. jaclaz [1] admittedly a couple machines were kept running Windows 3.11 [2] which for the record I got once pre-installed on a laptop and that I soon made into a dual boot with 2000 [3] and that - unlike what the common perception is - was not as bad as it is often depicted
  25. Good . I guess that through some additional torture we will manage to have - before or later - if not something easily reproducible, at least the patches for hal.dll and intelppm.sys. jaclaz
×
×
  • Create New...