jaclaz

Maybe (didn't really check) something *like* that has already been done. Try here : http://forums.mydigitallife.info/threads/22076-Latitude-D610-request-fix-for-137GB-BIOS-limit jaclaz

Not recommended why? On a Windows NT system if the OS supports 48 bit LBA there is no actual need for the BIOS to support it (of course one needs a "within 28 bit LBA" partition for the OS). At least it has been used for years by lots of people without any issues AFAIK/AFAICR, though a 120 or 128 GB SSD seems "just right" for the intended usage. And (just for the record) it should be SP3 onwards : https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/305098 Same as my concerns. In any case the 2 Gb are not that much for internet usage, it depends, but anyway the 7 should be tweaked to have a low RAM impact by the (mostly useless) standard services. jaclaz

Out of curiosity, how many years of PROFESSIONAL work with Autocad have you and your friends (cumulatively) experienced? And on which OS's? jaclaz

Good that it is MS terminology, you just saved 20 bucks : jaclaz P.S.: Maybe -just maybe - it is connected with "Replacevan" value in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Control Panel\Settings\Network: http://winaero.com/blog/change-network-icon-click-action-in-windows-10/ though seemingly the old Rundll32.exe van.dll,RunVAN doesn't work, maybe the Shell object works? https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/it-IT/a4b02c98-9f97-4555-9b4a-81c6dcf72d30/vandll-runvan?forum=win10itpronetworking

That would be a Stop Error 0x0000007b, yes, it is likely to be the (missing altogether) SATA driver in NT 4.0 and the only thing that you can do is to EITHER set the BIOS to "IDE compatibility mode" (or similar), i.e. enable in BIOS the compatibility layer for having the motherboard controller expose a IDE compatible ID or *try* using UNIATA: http://alter.org.ua/soft/win/uni_ata/ though I doubt it supports the controller your motherboard has (which should be a ICH9R). jaclaz

No you didn't (just for the record) You asked about "flyouts" (whatever they are), and the given lists are (or should be) about *all* "shell objects" or GUID's, hence the "See if you can find ..." Thank you however for letting me know that folders are not tray applets and that "flyouts" mean (according to your dictionary) "tray applets" or "whatever comes out when clicking on a tray applet". jaclaz

See if you can find 'em here (there are more than one): http://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/3123-clsid-key-guid-shortcuts-list-windows-10-a.html or here: http://decal.sdf.org/doc/launching-windows-special-folders.txt Date should be the same {E2E7934B-DCE5-43C4-9576-7FE4F75E7480} and power the same {025A5937-A6BE-4686-A844-36FE4BEC8B6D} jaclaz

... and do not forget how those using bitlocker to protect their private data managed to give the key to the good MS guys (they do have it, even if you quickly "deleted" it form the cloud), how many will know how to change it? https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/01/windows_10_whol.html https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/arnaud_jumelet/2010/11/12/how-to-regenerate-the-bitlocker-numerical-recovery-password/ jaclaz

Well, if you for a moment ignore the hype in the Mark Wilson's article and you check this one instead: https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/06/visual-cpp-telemetry maybe you will be less "preoccupied" by the feature (as said I find it sneaky and reproachable, still we have seen far worse things lately). About LinkedIn, my activities on that platform equate exactly to 0, but they have, besides the little data in my "profile" and obviously my "network", my gmail address, and they asked more than once, but without success , for my telephone number (just in case I would have been locked out). Sure Google has both of them already, but that is not a good reason why the good MS guys should also have them. jaclaz

Besides being (without any need) arrogant and offensive, by calling their customers "careless" or worse: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/06/teamviewer_sorry/ they (probably) are not the real culprits, still when you have a door (as opposed to a solid wall), no matter how good is the lock on it, it will be easier to open it than to break the wall. jaclaz

You need to try editing the iaiosd.inf file (Notepad will do), review: jaclaz

Hey peeps, everyone should be aware and understand the (probable) reasons why the (stupid) limitation has been put into place (besides commercial reasons). What happened at the time was that most hardware (but not the high-grade hardware used on server machines) was somehow not fully compliant with the requisites for the PAE or the drivers (chipset/motherboard/etc.) were poorly designed/implemented. The above led to have the first "user grade" systems with 4 Gb or more to be unstable. To be fair, at the time very few "user grade" machine had (in 2002/2003) more than 1 or 2 Gb of Ram, so the issues were not that many. With SP2 (2004) instead of actually tackling and solve the issues, the good MS guys decided to limit the amount of RAM and reserve the PAE , etc. to the Server OS (that are supposed to run on "better" hardware with "better" drivers). There is no reason why this or that "patch" won't have very different results in practice on different systems, the *whatever* makes the OS unstable on a given hardware is not corrected, so someone will have the patch working perfectly on a specific system and someone else will experiment corruption or blue screens with the same patch on another system. jaclaz

Well, the telemetry in visual studio is sneaky but all in all not that bad, I mean they should be crucified for not documenting it and setting it as default, but it is not a "real" threat. Anyway, they will get whatever personal data they cannot get through their stupid new OS through LinkedIn: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/13/linkedin-bought-by-microsoft-for-262bn-in-cash that would be something to be preoccupied about. jaclaz

Though on second thought - probably - if you have an old version, you can actually update manually. I.e. it seems like the issue is with some recent version of the actual program, so an older version may still work (with updated database). jaclaz

Ok, found some recent info, the above won't work the good MS guys seemingly f*ç#ed up the actual program, though hopefully (after some time) they at least acknowledged the issue: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/protect/forum/protect_defender-protect_updating/windows-defender-offline-definitions-out-of-date/1502d0d1-dd89-4cbe-9c66-3566ed759e98 http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/protect/forum/protect_defender-protect_updating/windows-defender-offline-definitions-out-of-date/1502d0d1-dd89-4cbe-9c66-3566ed759e98?page=5 One month to understand that there was an issue, and seemingly almost one month to not yet resolve it. Most probably it's not their fault, but they have to work on highly efficient Windows 10 machines ... jaclaz

... only it is not necessarily Spanish, beati monoculi in terra caecorum or In terra caecorum monoculus rex is medieval latin, it is common saying in many countries/languages and of course H.G.Wells is a classic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Country_of_the_Blind jaclaz

Try reading - possibly attentively - the thread I gave you a link to: http://reboot.pro/topic/20497-run-windows-defender-offline-from-winpe/ AFAIK the definition file mpam-fe.exe is common between offline and online defender, and to Security Essentials, etc.: http://www.intowindows.com/how-to-update-microsoft-security-essentials-mse-offline/ Unless of course the good MS guys have changed the format or whatever, but I guess we will never know, unless you try: 1) downloading the latest mpam-fe.exe 2) replace the mpam-fe.exe on your build before creating the bootable media OR: 3) run the mpam-fe.exe to have updated definitions (hence the suggestion to try on a USB stick) Will it work? I don't know. jaclaz

On the given thread there is one other user that laments similar problems, so you are not the only one, there are at least two of you, see "black sheep" here : https://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/3.htm Still there is not any definite solution that I could find a reference to, and even the problem is seemingly not very common (maybe the Defender Offline is not widely used or people are content with older definitions ), the only reknown issues that could be *somehow* connected are as said revolving around the generic issues with Windows Update (for which BTW there is not really a "logical" solution, only some "white magic" involving updating the Windows Update engine blindly), and this is often only a temporary solution. Again, how EXACTLY are you attempting to update? Have you tried MANUALLY? See: http://www.thewindowsclub.com/update-windows-defender-manually-windows-8 Have you tried THIS link: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=87342&clcid=0x409 that currently resolves to: http://definitionupdates.microsoft.com/download/DefinitionUpdates/VersionedSignatures/AM/1.223.1384.0/x86/mpam-fe.exe Or this one: http://download.microsoft.com/download/DefinitionUpdates/mpam-fe.exe Have you tried using PowerShell? http://www.thewindowsclub.com/update-windows-defender-definitions-using-windows-powershell jaclaz P.S.: The above links on MS are the ones for the 32 bit verson, the cooresponding 64 bit ones are: http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=87341&clcid=0x409 http://definitionupdates.microsoft.com/download/DefinitionUpdates/VersionedSignatures/AM/1.223.1384.0/amd64/mpam-feX64.exe http://download.microsoft.com/download/DefinitionUpdates/mpam-fex64.exe

... 4 (four) years ago and never actually posted any meaningful info on that one (nor in this one for that matter). Do you really believe that the few people with ESP are coincidentally also experts on Windows Defender Offline AND they are members of MSFN AND they are willing to assist you? Start with the standard litany, describe EXACTLY what you did to have the thingy working on DVD at the time, how EXACTLY you attempt to update, etc., etc. Generally speaking *any* kind of issues with Windows Update are happening lately, someone even believes them being intentional by Microsoft to push people towards the stupid Windows 10, it is entirely possible that your issue is connected to this "generic mess" of WU, with "update engines" new versions released every two months or so, the mpam-fe.exe (or *whatever*) might have been "left behind". As a side note (and JFYI) I would rather test first on a USB stick (as opposed to a DVD), like here: http://reboot.pro/topic/20497-run-windows-defender-offline-from-winpe/ jaclaz

Personally I would use the more recent Kb_extractor by Niemiro or good ol' expand from MS (and I am not at all a "guru of programming"): http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/155584-windows-update-extract-update.html As you have learned by 5eraph in the thread you linked the procedure is not as straight as it could be, as said it "is another thing". Had you missed the previous subtle hints , this is a technical forum, its members (and particularly myself) are not your close friends or relatives, and it is IMNSHO totally inappropriate that you call other members "dude", which is a slang, colloquial term, unsuitable for addressing people you don't know, please STOP using it to address other people (and particularly myself) besides irritating other people (and particularly myself) it serves no meaningful purpose apart showing your lack of respect towards other members (and particularly myself). Should you have missed the meaning of the word in the English language, (actually American slang) here it is: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dude Of course if it is your intention to appear as an unlettered, ill-mannered yute, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104952/quotes?item=qt0404568 feel free to insist with it, sonny : http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sonny jaclaz

No, the idea is not to make a "clone", it is to make an image. With dsfo, the result of the procedure will be a (huge, 29 Gb, hence the NEED for NTFS) file which contains an exact byte-by-byte copy of the whole source disk. Something *like* dsfo \\.Physicaldriven 0 0 Z:\myniceimage.img would do. With Clonedisk you can do the same image or you can make a clone, in this latter case of course the target contents will be overwritten and you won't be able to access any of the preoviouis data. Maybe you will find this relevant to better understand the terminology used:

It doesn't depend on the motherboard, but on the power supply. In old AT PSU the switch actually switched off the PSU. In new (new since what 15 years?) ATX power supply the "switch" is just a push button that turns the PSU in either "On" or "Off" which is actually more like a "suspend mode" the PSU is always "partially on" (but when it is off it is only powering a small subset of devices, typically USB ports and network card - this allows for switching it on with a combo-key and to have WOL - Wake On Lan, etc.). Most "good" quality ATX PSU's have anyway a physical switch 0/1 on the back, near the power cable socket. For the "memory effect" it doesn't make any difference to turn the PSU in "Off/suspend mode" or switch off completely from the switch on the back (or pulling the mains cable out). The motherboard, disks, etc. (and RAM) are powered only when the PSU is ON. jaclaz

About making the RAW image, since it is only 29 Gb in size, and thus speed of the imaging program is not a problem, good ol' dsfo (from the dsfok package) should work fine (it is a tad bit on the "slow" side but as said it won't matter given the small size of the source emmc). The issue might be whether you have an external hard disk with an NTFS volume capable of holding the whole 29 Gb file of the image (the thingy is as simple and as small as possible but it makes a RAW image, without any form of compression or compacting): http://members.ozemail.com.au/~nulifetv/freezip/freeware/ An alternative could be making a QuickPE (it is a PE made through a set of cmd scripts by the same Author of Clonedisk): http://labalec.fr/erwan/?p=402 jaclaz

It was too d@mn fast with 2k and you need to slow it down to a crawl , right? Seriously, it seems to me like a tad bit too old/underpowered to run Windows 7 . jaclaz

Have you looked in the getting started page? : http://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/get-started.html point #2.2.4 seems like relevant ... jaclaz