jaclaz

You might appreciate this : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/174668-experimental-builds/page-10#entry1112583 jaclaz

Well, it is off topic in the sense that it is not specifically referred to the Abomination (Windows 10 for the readers that are not part of the club). And yes, it is on topic, in the sense that even if you have done everything in your power to tame the Abomination, it is a good thing that you know how it is only a part of the issues, your daughter or nephew may actually be more exposed than you are through something that you wouldn't even consider dangerous (a child's toy). Why in my day the top technology were talking dolls, and you had to pull a string to have 'em talk, no fancy batteries, No Sir ... ... and we LIKED it! https://tinyapps.org/blog/misc/200702250700_why_in_my_day.html jaclaz

Still OT, but somehow related and JFYI: http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/11/when-children-are-breached-inside-the-massive-vtech-hack/ Continuing the OT, today it's Hello Kitty: http://news.softpedia.com/news/data-breach-on-hello-kitty-servers-over-3-3-million-accounts-exposed-497872.shtml jaclaz

Yep, and another part of the population that MS seemingly ignore are *all the rest of us*. If you look at it, they do have only two expected "customers": Enterprises (large ones) End private user <- please read as mindless consumers already made id*** by Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, etc. What about all the rest? Small businesses, small firms with 3 to 15 people, shops, workshops, artisans, individuals making a living as consultants, writers, programmers, etc., accountants, lawyers, architects and engineers (not part of big associated firms), doctors, and similar make up (at least here in Italy) for something like 40 or 50% of the total.... jaclaz

If there is one, it has just been crossed. http://makeit.netflix.com/netflix-socks Sure, Rip Van Winkle could have used those. jaclaz

Naaah, you do not "buy" an OS, you acquire a License to use it, additionally within a given set of rules or limitations stated in the EULA or license, there is not a real transfer of property. The point to debate might be whether the EULA represents a valid, binding contract. Given ad absurdum that it does represent a valid contract (IMHO it doesn't), with the advent of the abomination there is the further point of the OS being - through the modifications made by windows update - changed up to a point that it is not anymore what you agreed upon. jaclaz

Sure , I meant that later in that thread PROBLEMCHYLD listed much later versions that he uses in his unofficial service pack, like: ... USBPORT.SYS 5.0.2195.6941 ... It is possible that it is the "combination" of USBPORT.SYS with a specific version of another file related to the USB stack that makes it working or not (or it is possible that a specific hardware simply doesn't work with a newer version). jaclaz

Only seemingly OT, would you really use IE to access a FTP (as opposed to a "proper" FTP client)? I mean, besides the fact that the particular fix has been superseded, did you ever experience the issue?, Have you actually been locked out of a FTP when accessing it with IE 6? jaclaz

The tool is here: http://ali.dj/jumplist-launcher (as opposed to a - lousy or not - video of it) Something similar (cascading right click submenus) can be also made manually, JFYI: http://www.askvg.com/add-cascading-menus-for-your-favorite-programs-in-windows-7-desktop-context-menu/ jaclaz

I don't get it : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/91336-usb-20-stack-for-win98me/#entry617413 and following ... jaclaz

It seems like it does have all the mentioned "features": the mystery deepens.... The only *missing* thing seems the: maybe that is the issue. Edit: Yep, seemingly that is the problem, the PrefetchW seemingly comes from AMD (3DNow!): http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php?topic=145900.0 it completely fails to make any sense to connect the OS kernel to the presentce of that instruction, but I guess that is ordinary for the good MS guys nowadays. jaclaz

FWS i.e. SWF is the beginning of the header for "normal" Flash files. CWS i.e. SWC is the beginning of the header for "compressed" Flash files. Reference (JFYI): http://www.file-recovery.com/swf-signature-format.htm jaclaz

Yes that is exactly the point of my previous post. Naah they have it (I quickly checked file #15 ONLY): 4657538B Now the 465753 is FWS (i.e. the correct header start for a SWF or ShockWaveFlash file) problem is that the 8B is version, i.e. version 139! jaclaz

Pure folly : https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151214/07452133070/lightbulb-drm-philips-locks-purchasers-out-third-party-bulbs-with-firmware-update.shtml Retracted , but for how long? http://www.developers.meethue.com/documentation/friends-hue-update Now, this: translated, means: and this: translated means: I will translate this into Latin : excusatio non petita ... On the other hand it shows that a large company can actually revert a stupid change to their software , maybe someone in Redmond may take a hint... jaclaz

Synonyms: Winchary jaclaz

Yep, I understand that you knew it , but I was pretty much sure to have read somewhere an official MS page where it was stated that there were no hardware issues with the 8.1 upgrade, I don't think it was the same JorgeA found , but that one is anyway an indirect confirmation that I was recalling correctly. Just to prove that - set aside the demented choice of inserting a changed hardware requirement in what essentially is a Service Pack - they also failed to document it properly. Anyway , the issue is specifically about the CMPXCHG16b instruction, right? Or is it *something else*? jaclaz

Also (JFYI): http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-09/17/avg-privacy-policy-browser-search-data They are very honest and straightforward at it, but this does not mean that their policy is any good. http://www.avg.com/us-en/privacy#what-do-you-collect-that-can-identify-me http://www.avg.com/us-en/privacy#what-do-you-collect-that-cannot-identify-me http://www.avg.com/us-en/privacy#do-you-share-my-data jaclaz

Still OT, but somehow related and JFYI: http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/11/when-children-are-breached-inside-the-massive-vtech-hack/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/12/man-arrested-in-toymaker-hack-says-he-wanted-to-expose-inadequate-security/ It is probable that the kid (the arrested 21-year-old man) was just playing with the thing, and it got out of control, apart from the possible consequences he faces, the issue is IMHO of great importance, we are talking of millions of e-mails, personal data and more: ... and it's not like such a high level hack was needed to access the data, only a simple, re-known, old SQL injection... jaclaz

Well, this snippet is interesting: Would it be possible that the good MS guys are wrong or lying? jaclaz

NOT what you asked, but some XP files do work on 98, so they might also be of use under 2K? http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143253-windows-98se-with-98se2me-and-a-recent-usb-composite-device/ Also (maybe useful, maybe not): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/140051-digital-cameras-and-ptp-in-windows-2000/ jaclaz

Font be adraif, a typo can happen to everyone, BTW Welcome . jaclaz

You sure you are on the right place , this is MSFN , MSDN is here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/ jaclaz

Yep , and the settings are normally: EnableDisableBUT if you have set a password and disabled Secureboot they may become (on some UEFI's only as the U in UEFI stands for Unlike unified): EnableDisableSystem ManagedOnly on wednesdaysjaclaz

Most probably you tried to do too many things all together. Try with just one or at the most two .iso's. Do search on RMPREPUSB site about the "manual" ways to boot that particular .iso(s), and then compare with what Easy2boot made. If you have specific doubts/issues, and you ask about them DETAILing them, I believe it very likely that people may help/provide support, if you post "vague", "cumulative" descriptions, it is very unlikely, your last post more or less amounts to "I copied to the stick a bunch of .isos <insert here non-understandable description> and it doesn't work!" Each and every .iso may or may not work and do so for different reasons, start with (say) Windows 7, try only that .iso, describe what happens, etc. Start from here: http://www.easy2boot.com/add-payload-files/windows-install-isos/ jaclaz

It is one of those "strange" errors that seem like being recurring but for which there is not a *real* explanation. Can you try to install from another media/device (i.e. from a USB stick or - even better - from local hard disk)? It could be several things, including the CD/DVD reader firmware http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/15875/?o=20 It is likely that each of the various reports have some parts of truth (the actual .iso/CD may have been made with some "queer" iso levels or similar) jaclaz