jaclaz

To be fair a more extensive one is "broken piece of crap, increasingly more broken at each upgrade/update, broke (again)" jaclaz

Naah. Sometimes the trouble is if the monitor EDID does not provide the correct native resolution (or the windows doesn't understand it correctly) and if the native resolution is unknown or *somehow* forced to a different one, see, as an example of a "queer" case: but your monitor is native 1600x1200 and you run it a the correct native resolution, so nothing to worry about. jaclaz

Which OS? (I am assuming NT/2k/XP or 9x/Me) The easiest would be to use bootpart: http://www.winimage.com/bootpart.htm to recreate a new one. jaclaz

Well, I am sure that it is 4:3. It is native 1600x1200: https://www.cnet.com/products/samsung-syncmaster-213t/specs/ 1600/4=400 400*3=1200 @Rloew Quantum pixels? jaclaz

Yes, we are agreeing, of course noone is going to re-write the existing (and working) .scripts, but the issue/risk I was mentioning is that since (part of ) the Community is ( for the known reasons) ideologically anti-Winbuilder, the risk is that something that could run just fine under Winbuilder will be written on purpose to only run under PEbakery, doing IMHO a not-so-good service to BOTH Winbuilder and to PEbakery, creating more confusion to the "common users" . A "neutral" developer (like Misty) would use such a feature to "better" the experience under both Winbuilder and PEbakery, someone not-so-neutral may leverage on it to exclude or worsen the usage under Winbuilder (while still using its "botched" syntax). About the converter, I thought (maybe wrongly) that for each "Winbuilder command" you had a corresponding "internal PEbakery command", so it should not be so difficult to make a mapping between the "new sintax commands" and your "meta-commands" . I mean, while a "simple" converter would be very likely to introduce bugs or however chosse the "wrong possibility" in case of ambiguity, the capacity of PEbakery of interpreting correctly Winbuilder commands (by creating builds with original Winbuilder .scripts) is a guarantee of the correctness of the interpretation. Of course, there is nothing in itself "bad" about creating new projects, or .scripts (or plugins ) that will run ONLY under PEbakery using the "old" Winbuilder syntax but surely it would make very little sense, if we agree that one of the base main issue is the syntax and not the engine itself (set apart some minor "queer" behaviours and the often cited and mostly fluffy 32-bit vs. 64-bit argument). Another thing that I vote for is (if possible of course) Alacran's suggestion: and (as always only if possible, in due time, etc., etc.) have a detailed list of which parts/subsystems/whatever of .Net are actually needed. In a perfect world the PEbakery should be runnable even in a very minimal PE, so making a reduced .NET subsystem for these cases, or where the running OS for whatever reason has not a full .NET installed would be IMHO a plus (much like what Nuhi did in the good ol'times for Nlite). jaclaz

Not impossible, only very, very improbable. @Mcinwwl The divergence is only in the intended meaning of "common" or "popular" (and - conversely - of "not-so-unpopular") The 5:4 has never been IMHO "common", as it equates in practice to only 1280x1024. Remember we are talking of LCD's native resolution, not resolutions available on video cards. On CRT's, curiously (I presume due to the non-square form factor of the "pixel") the 1280x1024 worked just fine (often even better than the the actual correct resolution for 4:3 that is/was 1280x960) and it is entirely possible that the amount of such resolution we see is partially due to its use on CRT's (besides laptops/notebooks of the time, that AFAIK were very popular at 1280x1024) . This might be interesting (though it doesn't have much pre-2007 data): http://www.teoalida.com/database/screenresolution/ The Author divided some of the sheets in the nice spreasheet: http://www.teoalida.com/database/Screen-Resolution-Statistics.xls into columns 4:3, 16:10, 16:9, Less common resolutions, Weird resolutions, BUT put the 1280x1024 among the 4:3 ones (even if he perfectly knows it is 5:4). Anyway the registered "peaks" at around 17-18% allow us to be both right at the same time , as it is not enough to be called "common", but more than enough to be called "not-so-unpopular . jaclaz

Can you post which specific SCHTASKS.EXE command you used? This command: findstr /c:"[sR]" %windir%\logs\cbs\cbs.log >C:\sfcdetails.txt will write to the file C:\sfcdetails.txt all lines containing the string "[sR]" found in file %windir%\logs\cbs\cbs.log (if any). It is ismply a "filter" to avoid scanning visually the cbs.log for thoise lines. It is the CONTENTS of the file C:\sfcdetails.txt that may be relevant (or it may be not). Please, provide the standard litany: http://web.archive.org/web/20100713063536/http://homepage.ntlworld.com:80/jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/problem-report-standard-litany.html jaclaz

Really? How queer and surprising! Sure , just like - say - Demotic is much more readable than Hieroglyphs, but the point was about my hope for some new Greek, and JFYI: http://reboot.pro/topic/3380-sounds-arabic-for-me/ http://reboot.pro/topic/3380-sounds-arabic-for-me/?p=24277 BTW, and as a side-side note, the use of external programs, unless you are a computer science guru pontificating on how other people should write programs[1] is just some of the usual fluff, with no merit, there is nothing bad or good in using external programs or in not using them. If an external program exists, does what is supposed to do and does it well, there is no reason to re-implement it internally if not saving a few microseconds or milliseconds. And, as I already said, it is not that having a few seconds savings in a build actually makes that much a difference for the most part of the audience of the builder (while having a language that is simple, powerful and understandable may [2] make a difference). jaclaz [1] I mean programs that actually do something useful. [2] I am an optimist, and I still believe that removing the initial steep learning path (or at least smoth it down a bit) may contribute to have more people involved. :dubbio:

If I may, this is philosophically and philologically "wrong". EITHER PEBakery is (or will become) a "drop in" replacement for Winbuilder OR it is not (and it will not become) one. What I mean is the risk of creating a sort of Winbuilder "dialect" that PEbakery will understand whilst Winbuilder won't, You (Misty) and probably a bunch of other good people will have the sensibility to write (and maintain) their .scripts in such a way that they will work with both builders, but most will "choose" (for whatever reason) the one or the other (or will not willingly choose one but by chance or whatever will adopt the one but not the other) created (if there was not enough of it) some more direct or indirect reasons for divisions and quarrels. Mind you, I am still, in my perverted mind, of the opinion that the full all-round compatibility check for PEbakery, once successful is (or will be) the first step to have in the future a "better" scripting language. The till now exceptionally good syntax interpreting of PEbakery (and the possibility of directly run succcesfully "pure" Winbuilder .scripts) is what makes me hope that it will be able to achieve this goal. Temporarily, and while joveler is refining/completing/debugging it, it is of course fine to use "specific provisions" to workaround any issue, but it shouldn't be something that becomes a "habit". jaclaz

Not only NEC, there are still quite a few 4:3 monitors available, particularly in the high-end/professional sector, examples: http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/s2133/index.html Now, current prices for these are not exactly "cheap": NEC EA245WMi (24" 1920x1200) US$ 379 NEC P212-BK (21" 1600x1200) US$ 899 EIZO S2133 (21" 1600x1200) US$ 934.05 There are also still a very few other "affordable" makes/models, besides the "no-name" ones from China, you can still find some "new" Samsung SyncMaster 204B, but I believe they are "unsold warehouse" items. This is a good rant summing up the situation: http://www.inetdaemon.com/q-and-a/why-cant-i-buy-1600x1200-monitor/ jaclaz

There are two different issues. #1 installing a Windows 2000 on *any* USB drive - while doable - is not as easy/straightforward as a "normal" install #2 a 4k disk drive may makes matter more complicated or impossible at all IF the OP attempted to install Windows 2000 on USB "normally", it simply won't work, no matter the sector size of the device, while IF he is using one of the known methods: (links to 911cd.net may still largely be accessed via Wayback Machine) some changes may need to be implemented. IF the issue is ONLY in the NTLDR (and/or SETUPLDR.BIN) then - maybe - using the corresponding NTLDR (and/or SETUPLDR.BIN) and NTDETECT.COM may be enough to solve the issue. jaclaz

Which is WUXGA, 16:10 (8:5) and if you have a 16:10 monitor with that "native" resolution, it is just fine , while if you have a 16:9 monitor you would be better served by 1920x1080 "HD" (still given that that is the "native" resolution of the monitor). jaclaz

Pickyness challenge? You lose. I never said that 5:4 weren't available, as a matter of fact they are available even today, I said that: 1) the most common format for LCD screens was 4:3, like most (not all) CRT's 2) in the last ten years or so LCD's tend to be 16:9 or 16:10 Or, if you prefer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions In this nice graphic representation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions#/media/File:Vector_Video_Standards8.svg I can count: #12 4:3 resolutions #8 16:9 resolutions #6 16:10 (8:5) resolutions #2 5:4 resolutions [1] Now, which would be the most common ones? Possibly 4:3, then 16:9 or 16;10, as a matter of fact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_display_resolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio jaclaz [1] which are 1280x1024 and 2560x2048, of which the latter is rarely used

The diagonal size measuring is the same for CRT's and LCD's, what may change is the form factor, CRT's are almost invariable 4:3, as well once LCD's were 4:3 whilst (recent, let's say in the last 10 years or so) LCD's tend to be 16_9 or 16:10. BUT the technology is VERY different, unlike CRT's, LCD monitors have a "native" resolution. If you set *any* other resolution but the "native" one, the result will invariably be a (slightly) fuzzier screen, as it is the result of a transformation of the original feed. See: jaclaz

Research at NASA has however proved that comparing apples with oranges has some scientific validity, even after thousands or millions people used the analogy as an example of something impossible or improper, JFYI: https://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html All in all, notwithstanding your (and other people) efforts: I personally tend to remain possibilistic, never say never, tomorrow a breakthrough may still happen. jaclaz

and imagine here some more posts by people that didn't actually read (or did not fully understand ) the first post by FranceBB: BTW, I know a man who has a cousin who married a girl whose father runs XP in his basement . jaclaz

Well, one of the extremely rare cases where one can say "Vista was better" https://web.archive.org/web/20160420070054/http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Turn-the-touch-pointer-on-or-off There was a specific driver that enabled what you described, but how it works, (if it works) is hard to say (a lot of people complained that it - or an update to it - ruined their touchscreen experience by turning the touchscreen into a mouse/trackpad, whcih more or less is what you actually want): https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_10-hardware/solved-windows-10-touch-screen-acts-as-mouse/f8dd869d-993b-4f0d-9a92-def0f0f9fc68?auth=1 It is risky , however the new version is here: http://home.eeti.com.tw/drivers_Win.html jaclaz

You may contact directly covey_angel, preseli or klaus Klaus, they seemingly had a very similar problem: https://it.toolbox.com/question/the-problem-of-database-ms-access-101717 https://www.sythe.org/threads/the-problem-of-database-ms-access/ https://null-byte.wonderhowto.com/forum/problem-database-ms-access-0181524/ Next post recommending a specific software coming in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... jaclaz

...and calling himself "Google" ; On the other hand - since we (this time meaning Tripredacus, you and me) are seemingly on a pickiness contest, I find more disturbing using the singular third person of the verb with Google as a subject : (and that is in the original article). I would find Google the nearest thing I can imagine to a collective name https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/09/05/agreement-over-collective-nouns/ jaclaz

Oww, come on , we don't fancy your current strictness . Alacran forgot to put the title in bold and the text in quotes, it can happen by mistake to everyone. jaclaz

As I commented on the other board where Alacran posted: http://reboot.pro/topic/21660-windows-10-activity-history/ the name of the actual Registry key invoilved is IMHO saying something: https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/100341-enable-disable-collect-activity-history-windows-10-a.html PublishUserActivities jaclaz

Dibya, JFYI, only few people will understand what you probably actually meant by terrific, for some strange reasons the meaning has shifted from terrifying: http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/terrifying to (more or less) excellent or astounding: http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/terrific jaclaz

Most probably the AI governing the high level algorithm calculating the IQ sensed that you lied on your birth date and as a retaliation it lied to you[1]. Now, be nice, and do (timing 20 minutes, without distractions but also without googling) the test provided by Mensa Luxembourg: https://www.mensa.lu/en/mensa/online-iq-test.html or the "international" Mensa Workout (30 minutes): http://mensa.org/workout.php while both won't provide you with an actual IQ score, if you do very well in them, then you may consider to take the "official" test to join Mensa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International http://www.mensaindia.org/ Alternatively, find your way to take a "standard" test: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_classification jaclaz [1] thus creating a nice, symmetrical situation,

TOTALLY UNRELATED to this thread (that is about a specific way to hopefully solve a very specific problem with a specific model of disk drive). You won' t get the help you are looking for here. We simply have NO idea whatsoever about what you are asking, Try asking for support here: http://malthus.mooo.com/index.php? or here: http://forum.hddguru.com/ jaclaz

And in any case you can use xcopy (actually XCOPY32). SERVe Kentucky Fried Chicken Hot! http://www.duxcw.com/digest/Howto/hd/cpyhd/cpyhd2.htm The issue with the above may be what happens in case of errors, hence a more suitable little tool is ycopy: https://web.archive.org/web/20080731175052/http://www.ruahine.com:80/ycopy-file-copy-utility.html http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/System-Miscellaneous/Ycopy.shtml jaclaz