jaclaz

Well, than they were 601 and that one on the Search wasn't fixed. performing a search "by Author" with an empty string results in: WHILE previous versions of the board resulted into *ALL* posts by the given Author, or all threads in which he/she posted (though limited to a given number of them, 1000 if I remember correctly). Maybe you could make a spin-off of the thread moving to it all OT posts? jaclaz

In my experience, you do happen to do something "wrong" from time to time, but when compared on the amount of "wrong" things the IP guys do, you are a kid That is YET ANOTHER thing they broke, we will see if it is among the more than 600 (that is six hundred ) bugs that allegedly they are going to fix in the 4.1.9 version (currently we are in 4.1.8). If we can go linearly that would probably be 600*18=10,800 bugs introduced since version 3.x, which must be a world record ... jaclaz

And now, risking to go off-topic, let's talk of Wi-Fi netiquette http://www.troyhunt.com/2015/12/no-you-cant-join-my-wifi-network.html (likely to be "next" point of discussion with friends) jaclaz

I have NO Facebook (let alone Twitter) accounts. (there is a reason for it, BTW) I have seen friends (real friends, that I know and believe are otherwise normally extremely nice chaps) have bitter arguments on it, particularly about the "give friendship"/"remove friendship" issue. Luckily I saw it coming early enough to completely avoid touching the thing at all, I find much easier to say "I am not on Facebook" than to have to deal with either lots of posts/updates by people that - really - have nothing of worth to say, but still they do say their nothing several times each day - or to unfriend people because too much is too much. As I see it the whole Facebook issues are revolving around "other people's judgements" or "general consensus" or "popularity" people post (whatever crap they personally find interesting or fun) and expect that their "friends" will unconditionally approve that, and when this - for whatever reason - does not happen they feel frustrated or misunderstood. It is not entirely unlike (if you pardon me the pun) the "like" mechanism here on the board, I chose (being admittedly an old grumpy bastard) to NEVER "like" any post, though there are often posts that would actually deserve to be liked, if you "like" that particlar one than the poster, after the (possibly) initial gratification will wonder why you don't "like" his/her next post, and meanwhile another member might start wondering why you "liked" that particular post and not his/her own one, initiating a sort of (IMHO senseless) kind of competition or research for appreciation. jaclaz

Wouldn't also Powershell do? https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/heyscriptingguy/2012/05/08/use-powershell-to-back-up-system-state-prior-to-making-changes/ OT, but You might want to appreciate how in 8 the feature has been bettered by limiting it to a single checkpoint per day https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh849822.aspx so, if you need more than one (like when you are testing new, dangerous things) you need to override the default: http://superuser.com/questions/994854/why-the-create-restore-point-script-work-differently-on-windows-7-and-on-windo EDIT: Oops, I see only now how xpclient's reply also mentioned this new behaviour in 8. jaclaz

This is a good example of how these kinds of things are highly subjective, being old and grumpy I interpret this as meaning that the MS guys are a bunch of headless chickens that have not any idea how to setup properly their own crappy update mechanism. jaclaz

Allow me to disagree. There is NO actual "suite" capable of predicting *anything* on a hard disk status of health. The data coming from S.M.A.R.T. (the thing I personally call D.U.M.B.) are nothing but a set of mostly meaningless metrics, which may (or may not) be a rough indicator of the "past" of the disk drive that bears little or no connection to its future. Flippism has roughly the same reliability (JFYI): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128807-the-solution-for-seagate-720011-hdds/?page=187#comment-1073898 http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/170237-which-drive-sould-i-get/It is entirely possible that the "old" hard disk (though it being actually old and though the decision to replace it with a new one remains anyway a good decision) had no real issues (yet) and the sluggishness originally came from some OS conflict with one or more of those background accesses to it, and this obviously has not been fixed with the mere replacement of the disk. jaclaz

What I find really "queer" is that the board software does (seemingly) use CKEditor: http://ckeditor.com/ With the same, "standard" configuration I use (browser and OS) , their demo page: http://ckeditor.com/demo works flawlessly (at least in the few tests I made), and includes a "Source" button that toggles between WYSIWYG and HTML (as opposed to the WYSIWYG<>BBcode) that also works fine and allows (when needed) minor manual corrections. This should mean that the IP guys managed to introduce *something* that effectively creates the "weird" behaviour I experience on the board (sometimes words are not selected, focus shifts to somewhere else for not apparent reason, moving the cursor to another area of the post, like inside/outside of a quote or code box is quirky, etc.). jaclaz

Didn't notice it, of course the new board software changed also that, but I can remove it since at least now the search has a "normal" magnifying glass icon instead of the senseless gear one (normally associated to "settings" or similar). jaclaz

And now, radio amplifier attack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/03/23/hackers-can-unlock-and-start-dozens-of-high-end-cars-through-the/ Models that can be hacked Audi: A3, A4, A6 BMW: 730d Citroen: DS4 CrossBack Ford: Galaxy, Eco-Sport Honda: HR-V Hyundai: Santa Fe CRDi Kia: Optima Lexus: RX 450h Mazda: CX-5 Mini: Clubman Mistubishi: Outlander Nissan: Qashqai, Leaf Opel: Ampera Range Rover: Evoque Renault: Traffic Ssangyong: Tivoli XDi Subaru: Levorg Toyota: Rav4 Volkswagen: Golf GTD, Touran 5T https://www.adac.de/infotestrat/adac-im-einsatz/motorwelt/test_keyless.aspx jaclaz

Well, you can introduce a delay between the execution of the commands, *any* command without a definite output to the console would do. Usually a "ping to to self" is used, but to just slow down a little bit a loop, you can also insert another FOR /L loop FOR /L %%A IN (1,1,100) DO ( echo %random% FOR /L %%B IN (1,1,10) DO ( echo %random%>NUL ) ) jaclaz

I am then willing to translate "the new version is out and is on iscloud" to "somewhere on the internet". Mind you, it is perfectly OK , to NOT provide any definite location/link, but posting that in reply to this question; seems to me like being a non-reply. jaclaz

http://ss64.com/nt/for_l.html http://www.robvanderwoude.com/ntfor.php jaclaz

Hmmm. jaclaz

The Outlook I personally don't use since (say) 2001, the Search Indexer that anyone would normally disable and the Norton that shouldn't (IMNSHO) even come near a running system? All in all I would de-classify the issue from "surprising" to "normal" . I mean, if you are running a few resource hogs in background, it is not so improbable that one (or more than one) of them actually brings your system down to a crawl ... The issue may be now finding out if that amount of overhead in the I/O is the "normal" amount such tools are expected to create or if one of them is acting "queerly". jaclaz

It may depend on the exact Word (office) version, but there shuld be no problems with Autohotkey to replicate the key combos that "switch" between "corpus", header and footer. Or you could use a Word macro or keyboard shortcut, see: http://windowssecrets.com/forums/showthread.php/43955-Keyboard-shortcut-for-switch-headers-footers-(Win2K-Word-2000-9-0-6926-SP3) https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/update-fields-in-headers-and-footers/ http://www.techrepublic.com/article/take-a-shortcut-to-your-header-window-in-word/ jaclaz

What about CLS? http://ss64.com/nt/cls.html As a side note; I KNOW THAT I COULD DO IT LIKE : :b echo %random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random%%random% goto b BUT IT WONT STOP IF I DO IT LIKE THAT, SO I HAD TO DO IT THAT STYLE. IF ANYBODY OF YOU KNOWS HOW TO DO LIKE "WRITE IT 100 TIMES THEN GO ON THE NEXT COMMAND" PLEASE TELL ME it is a simple FOR /L loop FOR /L %%A IN (1,1,100) DO ( ECHO something ) jaclaz

The first screenshot (in safe mode) is "normal". The third screenshot is terrible. I would say that in your "full mode" you have a conflict of some kind (a driver or a background running task) How to find what it is may be a difficult question, check the driver, maybe you want to try re-installing the driver or check for an update version of it, but since it wrked before it is unlikely that a new version is needed, only maybe the current drive had some form of corruption. You could also try again on the "full" system after having reduced running services to a minimum and/or re-running the test with an eye on Task Manager resource usage and adding the columns "write" and "read" bytes (or whatever they are called). jaclaz

A batch was posted and deleted by accident, here it is it back: @ECHO OFF SETLOCAL ENABLEEXTENSIONS ENABLEDELAYEDEXPANSION SET Caption= ECHO Replace §'s with spaces ECHO. ECHO Drive§§Description§§§§§§§Size§§§§Volume Label FOR /F "tokens=1,2 delims==:" %%A in ('WMIC LOGICALDISK where "drivetype=2" get caption^,size^,volumename /format:list') DO ( IF NOT %%B.==. SET %%A=%%B IF DEFINED Caption IF %%A==VolumeName CALL :checkdata ) GOTO :EOF :checkdata SET %Caption%_Caption=§%Caption%:§§ SET %Caption%_Size=%Size% SET %Caption%_Volume=%Volumename%§§§§§§§§§§§ IF DEFINED %Caption%_Size ( call :truncatebytes %Caption%_Size ) ELSE ( SET %Caption%_Size=§§§§§§§§ ) ECHO !%Caption%_Caption!§§Removable disk§§!%Caption%_Size:~-8,8!§§!%Caption%_Volume:~0,11! GOTO :EOF :truncatebytes SET thisvar=!%Caption%_Size! SET thissize= SET units=TB GB MB KB FOR /L %%A IN (11,-3,2) DO ( SET thissize=!thisvar:~0,-%%A! SET unit=!units:~-%%A,2! IF "!thissize!"=="!thissize:~0,1!" SET thissize= IF DEFINED thissize SET %Caption%_Size=§§!thissize:~0,-1!.!thissize:~-1,1! !unit!&&GOTO :EOF ) GOTO :EOF jaclaz

Which I will translate to "at the time/date I did the search on google, in my localized results it came out as second result". Just for the record a google search result is not carved in stone, and can be in a different position (or be not there at all) in a subsequent search, and as well results may change depending on the location from which the search was originated, and will definitely vary when using "national" google sites (as opposed to google.com) and even from the same site and originating location on local OS/browser settings. jaclaz

It's official, PSA here: http://www.ic3.gov/media/2016/160317.aspx many, many pearls of wisdom in it. Particularly in the context of a risk of a Wi-Fi or however radio carried intrusion, I would like to cite/highlight: jaclaz

You are quoting an old post (and batch) by Steve6375 and Wonko (the Sane) already stated how likely he couldn't do much better, still this has nothing to do with the original question, which is about converting an Easy2boot stick to .iso (something the batch won't do or won't do correctly), as the scope of the batch is to create a grub4dos bootable .iso from a "plain" grub4dos bootable USB stick, AND: http://www.rmprepusb.com/tutorials/makegrub4dosiso jaclaz

You may want to ask the actual question and not a small part of it. (full disclosure, maybe I know what the actual question is, because we talked about it via PM). Remember, you want to reach a goal, express it, DO NOT divide the way you believe you can reach it in n little steps each disjointed from the previous one, there are several reasons for this, among them the fact that there may be "better" or "easier" ways to reach your goal, people doesn't know WHAT you are actually wanting to do, you may make an example for what you believe is the right approach which is either inaccurate or more simply "wrong" , so as soon as an answer will be given to you, you will come up with another question (because the answer is not suitable to your unknown goal) and then another question, and another question :ph34r:. You have a test1.cmd that creates text1.txt and a test2.cmd that creates text2.txt, yet, your code deals with two other files outputfile.txt and volname.txt, and there is no trace of text3.txt. So I have to assume that text1.txt is actually outputfile.txt and that text2.txt is volname.txt. I can provide you a perfectly valid answer to your question but that won't help you a little bit in getting near your GOAL, (this answers your question and example): @ECHO OFF SETLOCAL SET skip= SET /A Counter=0 FOR /F %%B IN ('TYPE test2.txt') DO CALL :merge %%B GOTO :EOF :merge FOR /F "%skip% tokens=*" %%A IN ('TYPE test1.txt') DO ( ECHO %%A %1&GOTO :out ) :out SET /A Counter+=1 SET skip=skip=%Counter% GOTO :EOF jaclaz

There are tens of "Manufacturer tool" versions, some may contain the needed configuration data, it is usually a hit and miss game (more misses than hits, unfortunately). Try seeing here SMI page: http://www.usbdev.ru/files/smi/ It is also possible (but EXTREMELY risky ) to edit/test different configurations, this is specific on Transcend: http://www.usbdev.ru/articles/a_smi/transcend_smi_marker/ There is a concrete risk of flashing *something* that may put the controller in a non-recoverable status, your mileage may vary. jaclaz

To be picky, as I am BTW, there is a single guy (authoritative and nice as he might be ) that stated that: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2008.07.windowsconfidential.aspx and at least another guy: http://technabob.com/blog/2007/04/01/windows-vista-easter-egg-discovered/ raises some doubts about the story. Futile as it might be as an exercise, it is at least *strange* that seemingly noone took some time in the last 7 or 8 years to (if not decrypt) at least find/locate the actual data chunk on the CD and document the finding. On the other hand we have several years of experience in dealing with the Windows XP setup process, and noone ever (AFAIK) found the *need* for setup to access these mythical 30 Mb of encrypted data (which if needed would have made - say - nlite or any other modification impossible). It is of course possible that a certain number of initial RTM CD's contained that data, but all in all it is not very credible, if anyone happens to have an original XP CD it would be nice if he/she could have a peek at it with a hex/disk editor and confirm or deny the existence of that data... jaclaz