jaclaz

The data you posted (created by MS own utility, remember) is saying that "Primary Hard drive" is performing VERY NOTICEABLY worse, whilst "Gaming graphics" (whatever it is) is performing VERY NOTICEABLY better. Real world experience tells us instead that they are "different" but not so dramatically so. You have to choose, you either believe yourself and your observations or the MS metrics, since results are so diverging. If you choose your own experience (as it would be logical) it is clear that the WE metrics are largely meaningless, and are not valid comparing tools between different OS's on a same (virtual or real) machine. As a matter of fact outside of "my WEI is bigger than yours" kind of discussions WEI is totally meaningless. jaclaz

Check ei.cfg. http://www.askvg.com/how-to-choose-desired-windows-7-edition-version-during-setup/ jaclaz

As I see it, whatever you think, there is no real evidence that anything (particularly not anything "permanent") happened connected to the CMOS battery replacement. And I have had systems (BOTH desktops and laptops) running with a depleted or without a CMOS battery at all and they worked just fine (just so you know). For *whatever* reasons *something* happened to the capability of your Windows XP install to detect/install the (SATA) CD/DVD drive. While this may be connected to a malfunctioning of the PSU (it doesn't matter AT ALL if you changed it 2 months ago, it could be malfunctioning even if you changed it half an hour ago), it is possible that you are experiencing the issue only because of some OS driver/device management issue. The *normal* troubleshooting path I would follow would be: 1) try the thingy with another PSU 2) try the thingy with an alternate OS 3) try in the current OS to uninstall and re-install hardware drivers, possibly cleaning the Registry, etc. 4) try some third party tool (such as the mentioned hotswap thingy) and see if *somehow* they see the device (since hotswap runs well after the booting phase this would workaround possible issues of timing with a defective PSU that provides not enough power). If you believe that changing the CMOS battery with one touched by a holy man or after having made a voodoo rite and danced around the PC dropping on it clover leaves will solve the problem, it is ok, of course, but it is unlikely to be the appropriate cure for this non-diagnosed issue. jaclaz

@xpclient Those seem some different (but still largely meaningless) metrics. I quickly checked the novabench site but there is nothing there explaining how they assign those *random* points and the relative weight on the total. And they do look a lot random. Are you telling me that with Windows 8.1 hard disk is 19.5/12.5-1=56% faster than in 7 (and as well 19.5/13-1=50% faster than in 10)? Come on it is entirely possible that some optimized drivers can increase a disk speed by 5% or 10% but 50%? And NoelC experienced actually the opposite, with Windows 8.1 being slower when it comes to disk: (which is actually consistent with the WE data before) jaclaz

Yep , I only analyzed the data you posted, highlighting how they are - to say the least - deceiving. Besides the "change of scale" (which as seen can be easily made comparable) the striking difference in the two graphics categories is really hard to be justified. The only thing that comes to my mind is the DirectX 12 vs DirectX 11 vs DrirectX n which (not really my field of interest/knowledge) might well be "game changers" (if you pardon me the pun), but that hardly makes an impact on anything that is non-high-speed-games, and besides apart the usual MS hype on the matter, I haven't seem them praised so enthusiastically by the (admittedly few) gamers I know if not for specific games. jaclaz

... meanwhile in Redmond ... A very well worded backtracking ... https://blogs.windows.com/business/2016/08/11/updates-to-silicon-support-policy-for-windows/ Notwithstanding the great success ... ... we are developing "plan B" ... jaclaz

No need to actually imagine anything, the future is now. http://motherboard.vice.com/read/yes-your-smart-dildo-can-be-hacked jaclaz

Hmmm. Actual numbers tell a different story. The Windows Experience in Windows 7 "assesses key components on a scale of 1.0 to 7.9" The Windows Experience in Windows 8.1 (and 10) "assesses key components on a scale of 1.0 to 9.9" And of course the metrics is largely meaningless, I mean the ratio between "graphics" and "gaming graphics" is (roughly) 1:10 which should mean that the relative weight of the items is either completely random or (intentionally) altered to favour the perception of a relevant "gaming graphics" performance increase. jaclaz WE_NoelC.xls

What about: systeminfo>C:\sysinfo.txt jaclaz

Have you checked this? https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/975654 jaclaz

Sure, post it under news jaclaz

Very likely it is possible to boot XP on it, once found a proper driver for the (I believe SATA) disk drive, and in any case booting from the USB (2.0) a "flat" XP or a "inside VHD" one should be perfectly possible. The issues may come from *all the other* drivers, the "specs page" (in typical HP style) provides only a small fraction of the information needed. If you have the actual laptop handy (running 7 or 8.1) you should make a detailed list of the hardware, from that - maybe - it would be possible to understand what drivers are needed and whether they exist/can be found for XP. Personally I use SIV: http://rh-software.com/ a full report would be largely overkill for just listing the hardware, a simpler "File->Save PCIdata" would be enough I believe. jaclaz

Well, then try with the old PSU. The firmware of the actual CD/DVD should be anyway irrelevant, the "basic" info for OS detection would be the same. The connection and re-connection of the power plug making it working again points towards an issue with power supply. What happens if you scan for new hardware on device manager? IF it is a power issue, then maybe it is connected to boot-time "timing" of the startup of the devices and once the system has booted the device is seen again. It is not like you have*something* in your system for hot-plugging eSATA (please read as SATA) devices? Something *like*: http://mt-naka.com/hotswap/index_enu.htm If you do not have it (or *something* similar) you could try that, it may be able to offer a temporary workaround. jaclaz

That is called vote trading : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_trading And in English is often referred to in Latin as quid pro quo (what do the English know of Latin?): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quid_pro_quo instead of do ut des. jaclaz

Actually BOTH : You are getting old AND the process is highly accelerated by the use of Windows 10. jaclaz

Most probably the DefVis is a (completely arbitrary) addition - possibly standing for "Default Visibility" - to allow to distinguish "modified" keys/packages from "untouched" ones... jaclaz

Which is probably good. Now why don't you start a suitable thread (containing a proper description of your work, instructions to use it, etc.) in an appropriate section of the board, like here: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/34-windows-xp/ and post a link to it? jaclaz

Most probably it is the "visibility" setting in the Registry: jaclaz

Try again, with "Failsafe settings" and another cable you can use alright (for the sale of the test) one of those crappy ones you have as spare, then all that remains is a (coincidental) partial failure of the actual CD/DVD drive, which you should be able to test separately by connecting it to another machine. BUT the fact that it started loading and then suddenly stopped may mean something else. I wouldn't (as I never do) totally exclude a PSU issue (I have seen too many of them). Try (again for the sake of testing) disconnecting the power from your hard disks and test again the CD/DVD drive (ideally you should have a spare PSU). jaclaz

You make it sound like we were living on different planets ... jaclaz

Well, laptops are "bad beasts" when it comes to drivers, there is no way to know if another (similar) laptop with a similar video card will work, or viceversa, even if we have an actual, proper, valid report that it is working, nothing really says that is working on your laptop, unless it is EXACTLY the same make and model (and even then a seemingly minor thing such as a different BIOS revision or amount of RAM in a same make/model may make the difference between working or not working). jaclaz

Well, post the EXACT make/model of the "modern" laptop you found (the one you completely failed to specify), if someone has EXACTLY the same make model AND he/she runs XP 64 bit AND he/she has a working driver he/she might post the EXACT version of the driver that work on it. jaclaz

Just so you know, we do have a couple of "solutions", what we miss are some confirmations AND some PROPER diagnosing of the problems. The issue here is that the 7200.11 failed in great quantities and went to either BSY or LBA0 for a known reason. By pure chance a number of 7200.11 went as well into BSY or LBA0 for a similar reason. Here it is described a "cure" for certain symptoms (the BSY or the LBA0) of the 7200.11's and we know that like 95% or more of bricked 7200.11's were bricked by the same illness (which the "cure" is suited for). There are a few - actually "vague" or "unconfirmed" - reports about the same (or very similar) set of commands used for the 7200.11's do work for the 7200.12 BUT the issue is that we don't know how many bricked 7200.12 are bricked for the same (or similar) reasons why the 7200.11's bricked themselves, as such it is risky to use a "cure" for an unknown illness: http://computersciencelabs.blogspot.it/2011/02/seagate-720012-sim-error-firmware-fault.html jaclaz

Before I forget, for those with a recent Windows system (AND actually convinced that having something running in the background AND accessible from the outside is a good idea), there is a new kid on the block: https://ulterius.xyz/ https://github.com/Ulterius Still very, VERY experimental, but maybe worth to keep an eye on. jaclaz

Ok, OT but still relevant, the good MS guys made a mess of the managing of the (in itself already stupid enough) SecureBoot lock on RT devices: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/10/microsoft_secure_boot_ms16_100/ As expected (it had to happen before or later) the Secure Boot Debug Policy was leaked with the consequence that many Surface RT's (and similar Windwos RT devices) can be finally made free to boot *whatever*. This is actually good news for the (very few) morons gullible users microsoft trusting customers that bought for a rather steep price only a couple years ago a device that can ONLY run an OS that isn't developed anymore and will be not supported starting 2017 or 2018. BUT it clearly shows (had it not be self-evident enough) that: 1) EFI/UEFI is confirmed to be a stupid way to boot a machine 2) provisions in it are - besides stupid and stupidly implemented - a theoretical only mish-mash that fails in practice, because people are humans and they do mistakes 3) the theoretical idea of a "golden key" or "master key" for *whatever* is as secure as the mindset of the people possessing it, and since they are humans, it will leak (it is just a matter of time) 4) these are the same people you give your data to, believing they will keep it secure, when they cannot even manage properly their own stuff jaclaz