jaclaz

Well, seemingly not according to the good MS guys: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-8/system-requirements The requirements are exactly the same. Where did you gather this info about Windows 8 (no such thing as "Classic" exists) having different ones from 8.1? jaclaz

Well, what makes you think that you can arbitrarily ADD the contents of any two columns? http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/what-task-manager-memory-columns-mean#1TC=windows-7 https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ff382715.aspx jaclaz

Ok, what are the settings? I mean does it have a CSM (Compatibility Support Mode) capability? If you properly select that, it should boot to (say) USB (the UEFI is then not used but the BIOS is) See if this helps: https://forum.ts.fujitsu.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46061 jaclaz

Which EXACT make/model of laptop is it? Which firmware version/revision? jaclaz

Which is fine and dandy, since the "experimental" version has the watermark regardless of a donation key being present. What is the issue? Are you surprised of the watermark being displayed? jaclaz

The point is actually to determine BEFORE if the building actually *needs* being replaced. In most cases minor or major modifications to the actual building will solve the issue at hand (which also needs to be exactly determined before) without needing to demolish and rebuilding from foundations (or from grounds up ) With the latest windows, set apart the "appearance" thing and even the issues about (the complete lack of) ergonomics, the question is actually which improvements are there and more than that which problems affecting previous versions were actually solved? I.e. not only there is a general failure in the HOW they (presumably or assertedly) solved the issues, there is an underneath one about WHAT the issues were. jaclaz

Well, it seems like the fence paradox by good ol' G.K.Chesterton has found (yet another) real life example. JFYI: jaclaz

Do they? Where/How? jaclaz

Sure, but let's not confuse cause and effect, the "unfortunate" OSes *need* tweaking exactly because they are "unfortunate", we could use "malformed at birth", but "unfortunate" conveys (at least to me) the right amount of pity and sorrow for the poor, little OS. jaclaz

More or less, yes. It depends, most tools can be normally "installed" to the PE at build time, essentially this is what the builder scripts do, imagine them as if they were "offline installers", they put the program and all dependent files where they should be, they add the relevant keys to the Registry, etc., of course for "inherently portable" (i.e. tools that need not an installation) the action of the scripts are usually merely those of copying the executable file to the build and add a shortcut to it (if the PE includes a shell with such shortcuts/links). Then there are the tools like those called "portableapps": http://portableapps.com/about/what_is_a_portable_app that use a different approach, what you get is usually something that has been made into portable by using a "wrapper", these usually tend to be a tadbit slower or more cumbersome to use because of this overhead when compared to a tool that needs not an installation or those that were pre-installed. There are launchers for these (like p-start or similar) that you can use to add these programs (both the "no-install-needed" and the "portable apps") to the stick without needing to actually re-build the PE. Yep , just do it. jaclaz

As before, yes and no. It is possible to have sticks that boot BOTH BIOS and UEFI machines, but making one of them is senselessly (IMHO) complex. As always you shouldn't take my opinions as the ultimate truth (though usually they are very near to it ), but aside the fun in making this dual boot thingy, it is similar to the AIO's CD/DVD's or the "fully unattended" ones, you either professionally do tens or hundreds of recoveries or installs to n different make/models of hardware or it makes little sense to waste time in an attempt to build a "one media/device fits all" solution, as it is something that is nice in theory but always or nearly always results in practice in "several media/devices fit most". A PE by definition is "volatile", or more properly it uses a "volatile environment" what you actually write to the Registry when booted won't be saved/available at next boot, if you prefer the whole PE stuff was designed to be run from Read Only media and be limited to "preliminary" (it is called PE because it is a Pre-install Environment) or "emergency" situation. This is on one side a limitation, on the other it is a feature, as you have far less risks of corruption or infection, etc. Of course there are workarounds, tricks and what not, but essentially you never install a program inside a PE, you rather build a PE with the program pre-installed to it (or you re-install the program at every boot, this is sometimes possible, sometimes not, it depends on the specific program and with it's needs to have a user account or needing a reboot to complete install). And- still of course - it is usually trivial to add to a PE build *any* program that doesn't really need an installation. As always the doubt might be, do you really *need* to make a "simple" PE extremely complex only to have it look and behave *like* a "full install"? Or would it make more sense to use the PE with its limitations along it's intended paradigm (in a "preliminary" and/or "emergency" context) and use *something else* to replace a "full install"? Like (example) a "portable", "universal" install? http://reboot.pro/topic/9830-universal-hdd-image-files-for-xp-and-windows-7/ Everyone should try all available possibilities and then choose what he/she finds more suitable to his/her actual *needs*. jaclaz

No prob . Did you contribute money to develop? The point should be more about silently than patiently. jaclaz

I like the concept of "unfortunate OSes" jaclaz

You don't "get" it, you "build" it. Four possible ways (there are more than these): 1) get the Windows 7 WAIK from Microsoft and build from it a "basic" Windows PE 3.x: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd349343(v=ws.10).aspx 2) get the quickPE thingy here: http://reboot.pro/files/file/340-quickpe/ http://reboot.pro/topic/18744-quickpe/ and build with it a less basic PE from WAIK or from your Windows 7 install DVD or .iso 3) get the MakePE3 and build with it a PE 3.x from your Windows 7 install DVD or .iso: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143529-make-pe3-program-to-create-portable-windows-7-pe/ 4) get the Windbuilder project Win7PE_SE and build with it a PE 3.x from your Windows 7 install DVD or .iso http://w7pese.cwcodes.net/ The above are listed in order of complexity of use and complexity of the result, the "standard" WinPE from MS is so basic that has very few practical uses, the QuickPE is what it should have been while still simple and basic enough, the MakePE3 is more complete and allows a certain degree of possible customizations, the Winbuilder Win7PE_SE has an initial somehow stteper learning curve but allows to have anything (and the contrary of it) in the build, once you will have managed to learn how. jaclaz

Most probably you are NOT having the "same" issue. Try describing with some meaningful details, like OS, filesystem, hard disk model type how it is or was partitioned, etc.) "your" issue and we'll see if we can give you some assistance. jaclaz

It might be a better time to get one, at least something is stirring in the fake cell simulator regulations: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/12/government-can-you-hear-me-now-cell-site-simulators-arent-secret-anymore Now some more news: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/12/11/hundreds_of_thousands_of_engine_immobilers_hackable_over_the_net/ jaclaz

Only seemingly OT: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2015/12/09/firefox-os-pivot-to-connected-devices/ Basically translates (as I read it) to "the next Revolution will be made out of IoT, we tried leveraging on the previous one and we failed at it, let us try the same people and approach with the second". Or if you prefer : in a modernized version, more similar to: http://nfs.sparknotes.com/lear/page_138.html jaclaz

I wouldn't be so sure that the *whatever* data recovery software recovered the files correctly, however, what I would do would be to try TriD on them and see if it can identify a file format and also try them in VLC that usually can play *almost anything*: http://mark0.net/soft-trid-e.html http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ Still personally I would try the recovery through "manual" means (after having made an image of the SD card) as it is very possible that the carver in the (unknown) file recovery software you used failed in "properly" recovering files. jaclaz

OT and definitely NOT something you guys will actually like , however JFYI: https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2015/12/09/cortana-now-available-here-and-when-you-need-her-no-matter-what-smartphone-you-choose/ jaclaz

Maybe one could put the contents of the "script" into the clipboard: http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/14770/copy-text-file-or-directory-into-clipboard-from-command-line/ and then paste it into the command prompt: http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/25590/how-to-enable-ctrlv-for-pasting-in-the-windows-command-prompt/ jaclaz

No. The motivation was and is seamless integration of advertising into everything, confusing users and luring them into clicking at random, thus rising the chances of getting more revenue by means of click count, referred purchases or whatever. OT, but FYI: http://au.idigitaltimes.com/study-children-cannot-distinguish-between-google-search-result-and-ads-111014 jaclaz

Neither would jaclaz, rest assured, but the alternative ENTECH stuff: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/174263-strange-mouse-behavior-on-an-lcd-monitor/ seemingly doesn't work properly with Intel boards. However nothing prevents anyone to manually calculate the Registry values: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/custom-resolutions-on-intel-graphics jaclaz

Or - more simply - compress them into an archive (such as a .zip file) and attach the .zip. jaclaz

Try using DTD Calculator. It can be found here: http://www.clevertec.co.uk/productsfree.htm Make SURE you read and understand the instructions/howto: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/26-home-theater-computers/947830-custom-resolution-tool-intel-graphics-easier-overscan-correction.html jaclaz

No. Meaning that a LCD monitor has no "max resolution", it has only a "native resolution" or "recommended resolution", which sometimes is improperly referred to as "max resolution". Any "display mode" but that one will be an "interpolated/calculated" one, in practice it will be less sharp and very likely (unless you keep a resolution with the same 1600:900 or 16:9 ratio) it will be "stretched" or "deformed". See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_resolution http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/159029-monitors-for-win98se/ http://www.cnet.com/products/asus-vh202t-p-lcd-monitor-20/specs/ You can use dumpedid: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/dump_edid.html to check the resolutions your monitor supports (still there will only be a "native" one, 1600x900 in your case that dumpedid calls "Maximum Resolution" ) jaclaz