jaclaz

Starting when? jaclaz

Loosely, something *like* this?: https://www.cartft.com/catalog/il/1587 t seems like the good guys over there have drivers for 9x/Me and NT 4.00 too (at least for some TFT displays) : https://www.cartft.com/support/drivers/TFT/ jaclaz

Actually you are not communicating anything to MS (and in any case you faked to install Warez, you just claimed that you had just discovered that someone had done that), you are just buying from an Authorized reseller a GGK. If the Windows 7 GGK is available for sale, it is available for sale, you buy it, the seller gets the money, everything is cool and dandy. What you buy is a license and the proof of it being legal is (besides the original media you will be given) the sticker that you have to put on your PC. When (if) the MS police SWAT will break into your house at dawn they won't find any Warez installed on your PC. If at the time of the break-in you will have already installed the GGK there will be no traces of the (previously faked) Warez install, if you haven't yet they will find you with a PC with no OS installed and you might claim that you already wiped the hard disk . Of course there is a concrete possibility that they are monitoring this thread and watching every move you make (and also every breath you take) but the most they will be able to do would be to sue you for falsely confessing a crime that noone ever committed. There is a remote possibility that you will be subjected to an "extraordinary rendition", but as the name implies it would be "extraordinary". jaclaz

Well, it's easy. On day one: You get a new PC. You (fake to) install a Warez release to it. The next day: the PC is not new anymore (it's one day old, and it's existing ) you (claim to) discover that on the PC there is non-genuine Windows install you can (re-)install the Windows 7 through the GGK The note you cited is probably because you cannot have the GGK accompanying a new PC, i.e. the seller of a new PC can only accompany it with an OEM license (thus taking the responsibility of support) or with a "full" license, which - if available is way costlier than OEM (but allows for transferring the OS to a new system), whilst the GGK is more similar to a "full" license (i.e. MS has the responsibility for support) though it keeps the limitation of non-transferability. Of course in the real world neither the OEM nor MS will ever provide any meaningful support anyway. jaclaz

A) No (but maybe Yes, meaning that some of them do use "under the cover" grub4dos which is to all practical effects a minimal CLI Operating System (think of DOS) including the possibility of running batch scripts and even "native" executables, but No, it has not the capability to connect to the internet and downloading anything) B) No (none of them are *Linux*) but Yes a Windows 7 based PE (i.e. a PE 3.x) can be made practically indistinguishable from a Windows 7 "installed", but nothing really prevents you (if not - possibly - licensing issues) to have a "real", "installed" Windows 7 on a USB stick. jaclaz

I don't know. At first sight it seems (to me) more complex than needed. Maybe you could try starting from a "simpler" base *like*: On Error Resume NextConst wbemFlagReturnImmediately = &h10Const wbemFlagForwardOnly = &h20strComputer = "."WScript.EchoWScript.Echo "=========================================="WScript.Echo "Computer: " & strComputerWScript.Echo "=========================================="Set objWMIService = GetObject("winmgmts:\\" & strComputer & "\root\CIMV2")Set colItems = objWMIService.ExecQuery("SELECT * FROM Win32_DiskPartition", "WQL", _wbemFlagReturnImmediately + wbemFlagForwardOnly)For Each objItem In colItemsWScript.Echo "DeviceID: " & objItem.DeviceIDStartLBA = Int(objItem.StartingOffset/objItem.BlockSize)NumSectors=Int(objItem.Size/objItem.BlockSize)WScript.Echo "StartLBA: " & StartLBAWScript.Echo "NumSectors: " & NumSectorsWScript.EchoNextjaclaz

Well, again, if you explain WHAT you actually *need* and WHY you *need* it, there may be "better" ways. Also, what you posted is a snippet, as asked before, can you post the actual .vbs EXACTLY as you run it (AND post information on how exactly are you running it)? However this: strStartLBA = strNumberBlocks/strBlockSize doesn't sound right. You get the StartingOffset (in bytes) and divide it by blocksize to get StartingLBA (in sectors or blocks) and of course you get size (in bytes) and divide it by blocksize to get size (in blocks). jaclaz

No. The disk signature is an almost binary problem, it is either valid or is it not, if it is not the drive letters assigned to partitions might change, making invalid a number of links/hardcoded paths and (if this happens on the system disk) the OS won't boot (or won't boot properly) while if a disk signature change happens on any non-system disk it will just be a matter of re-assigning drive letters manually. Anyway it costs you nothing to uninstall the USB devices and reinstall them and their drivers, what I would do would be to additionally "clean" the USB stack related keys in the Registry, you are nor the first one (nor will you be the last one) to experiment "queer" behaviour with USB devices (and this sometimes can be solved by simply "refreshing"), see here for some suggestions/tools: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/157408-usb-connectdisconnect-delay/ jaclaz

Not really . That is - more or less - an application of Pareto's Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle it does have it merits. The point is not at all about what they removed or changed, it is A LOT about the incredible number of preventive measure, unneeded complications (and what not) they included to force every user to experience a sub-standard environment, making it extremely difficult for them to change the looks (which is IMHO a more marginal part) and the actual ergonomics of each and every tool, making a number of useful tools not working anymore, effectively changing some consolidated usage paradigms and re-setting users settings to a (stupid and in some ways also "dangerous") default they believe is a "one-size-fits-all" for every user. I mean - and I know I will probably be flamed for this - I never liked the way the default Windows shell worked in 2K or XP, but that was (is) not a problem, there were quite a few alternative shells available and I soon found out that blackbox was perfect for my use of a system, and installing and configuring it was a piece of cake. Then there is the issue of the calculator, I use RPN. (RPN is way better and faster if you do calculations so I use a third party RPN calculator). More generally I have configured my system in such a way that it is perfectly configured for my needs (and it cost me very little time created very little issues), BUT if I have to use any other MS OS (up to 7) with its "standard" shell and built-in tools (as an example when I am visiting some customer and using theur computers) - while "losing" some "speed" and "convenience" - I can do the same things that I can do on my "custom configured" system. This - with "stock" windows 8 and later - is simply not possible. Of course someone will come out stating how I am old (which is true) and grumpy (which is also true) and that this is the reason why I cannot do even the simpler tasks on 8 and later without the greatest effort and waste of time, but really this is not the case, in all these years I have used (and sometimes still use) almost *any* OS that ever saw the light, including all versions of DOS, all versions of Windows, many different releases of Linux, even OS/2 and BeOS, and I never experienced the same sense of being forcefully led into a wrong usage paradigm as I experienced in the (admittedly brief) tests I made with 8/8.1 (and 10 seems like not any different in this). Now I can understand that for *some reasons* I won't be able anymore to use other people's PC's , but at the very least I expect to be able to configure my own system the way I like it and it is more productive for me , without the risk of having all my settings and third party apps being reset/removed overnight : and without going through numberless loopholes to actually make a proper configuration . jaclaz

And now this is a shorter version (still taking into account use on a non-partition): @echo offecho This cmd has been run from LogicalDrive %~d0\FOR /F "tokens=2 delims=#," %%? IN ('WMIC Path Win32_LogicalDiskToPartition Get Antecedent^, Dependent ^|FIND "%~d0"') DO (ECHO LogicalDrive %~d0\ is residing on \\.\Physicaldrive%%? && GOTO :done)ECHO Drive letter %~d0\ is NOT assigned to a partition on a disk.:donepausejaclaz

Be my guest : @echo offecho This cmd has been run from LogicalDrive %~d0\SET message=FOR /F "tokens=3,6 delims=#,=" %%A IN ('WMIC Path Win32_LogicalDiskToPartition Get Antecedent^, Dependent') DO CALL :isitapartition %%B %%AIF NOT DEFINED message (ECHO You are either dencorso or someone else trying to make a oneliner senselesslyECHO complex without any meaningful reasonECHO Drive letter %~d0\ is NOT assigned to a partition on a disk.) ELSE (echo %message%)pauseGOTO :EOF:isitapartitionIF %1=="%~d0" SET message=LogicalDrive %~d0\ is residing on \\.\Physicaldrive%2GOTO :EOFjaclaz

Seemingly the 1061 does support firmware upgrade (as well as later Asmedia chips/cards): http://www.asmedia.com.tw/cht/products_list.php?item=109&cate_index=0 differences seem more into different (more) features of the SATA standard implemented in later chips. As a side note, having the possibility to flash a new firmware is a good thing as long as such firmware actually exists/is available AND is supported AND is documented, for Asmedia it is not that easy, and it may well brick the thingy, available files are "unofficial", *like*: http://www.usbdev.ru/files/asmedia/ jaclaz

Then it is a good thing that it isn't listed, as it is unlikely that someone would want to to install grldr.mbr to it. jaclaz

Naaah everything is fine and dandy as long as you don't use the XP Disk Manager (though Microsoft should have been sued for not having "fixed" the mess). If you have not yet fully understood the 63 I guess a few more days will be needed for the 255 . Don't worry, there is no need to fake understanding, you can accept the whole thing as an axiom, all MS OS's until Vista have been developed in a time when *everything* had a "CHS geometry" which is nowadays not needed. The XP Disk Manager has been (badly) coded in such a way that in some specific cases it can destroy the chain of partition table in the Extended partition because of some (wrong) assumptions about this "CHS geometry". Maybe these pages on Wikipedia would help you in understanding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylinder-head-sector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_boot_record Actually starting from NT 4.00 the CHS geometry is unused/unneeded (exception made for the initial part of booting), but NT 4.00 had to co-live with DOS and so a number of previous de facto standards were implemented in it, same probably goes for 2K that likely had to co-live with 9.x or with Me, XP is simply a Windows 2K with some bells and whistles, most probably the code in Disk Manager has not changed much, and the routines to deal with logical volumes inside extended are probably still the same since DOS 3.3, and at the time the whole stuff about "having more than one partition" was little more than a half-@§§ed, temporary "hack". jaclaz

Like reading the offline Registry (no need to load the hive), *like*: http://reboot.pro/topic/11312-offline-registry/ http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/registry_file_offline_export.html jaclaz

I don't get it. How EXACTLY are you running that snippet? WHAT (EXACTLY) does it output? The partition starting offset is actually the "start lba". Filesystem type cannot be anyway determined by the partition ID, the partition ID (though this has not been clear for years) is only a "protective ID". Right now a partition ID of 07 may mean - besides HPFS - both NTFS or exFAT so it is pretty much meaningless . I suspect that this thread is more or less directly connected to this one: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/174825-get-disk-number-from-drive-letter-in-cmd/ maybe - just maybe - if you can provide a general idea of the context and your expected final goal there could be other, better or faster (or both) ways, as always I may well be wrong , but I have *somehow* the feeling that you are trying to reinvent the wheel, one spoke at the time .... jaclaz

Hmmm. Are they all Primary? (or second and third are Logical Volumes inside Extended?) Are you sure-sure that the XP (and the other) partition were not converted to NTFS? The "third" partition may have issues in 9x because it crosses the 128 Gb (LBA48) border. As a "rule of the thumb" DOS (and conversely Windows 9x) *like* anyway a single primary partition and all the rest inside Extended (more or less if FDISK doesn't allow you to create something, it is because that something is not guaranteed to be working, but this should not be your case ). From the XP (which I presume can access all three volumes) do run Hdhacker: http://dimio.altervista.org/eng/ you want to make a copy of first sector of the \\.\PhysicalDrive (the MBR) and a copy of the fisrst sector of the three volumes/partitions (aka \\.\LogicalDrive), then compress the four files into a .zip archive and attach it to your next post. jaclaz

168105984/255/63=10464,113538748832866479925303455 <- not a particularly "round" result 168105984*512/4096=21013248 <- good 168105984*512/1048576=82083 <- very good It is "good" in the sense that it is 4096 bytes aligned and Mb aligned. It is "no good" in the sense that it has logical volumes inside Extended (which is not a problem in itself) BUT you MUST remember to NEVER use, for ANY reason, the XP built-in Disk Manager to change ANYTHING on the disk, not even the Active status of a primary partition, for the reasons explained: http://reboot.pro/topic/9897-vistawin7-versus-xp-partitioning-issue/ http://www.dcr.net/~w-clayton/Vista/DisappearingPartitions/DisappearingPartitions.htm jaclaz

Check, double check and triple check that you are shorting the right pins, then it is a matter of timing besides luck, see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/129551-unlocking-terminal-of-seagate-es2-in-bsyled000000cc-state/#entry944000 jaclaz

They may work fine , but the drive letter N: is nowhere to be seen in the output, which should mean that it is not a partition that is mounted to drive letter N: . jaclaz

See if these fit the bill: http://www.tmeeco.eu/9X4EVER/GOODIES/W98driverPacksFromUBCD/ jaclaz

The idea is to have a "Server" with OS/2 warp serving diskless station(s) the Win9x OS. Basically, apart for the initial setup these PC's need not a local hard disk and will be network booted. The parts that our Windows 9x/Me friends will likely find of bigger interest are parts 5 and 6, where (indirectly) the concept of a separate "miniwindows" or "nucleus" on a "virtual superfloppy" and "all the rest" on a "plain network drive" is explained in detail. jaclaz

... and I bet it'll be the 1st post of a brand-new member. ... you like to win easy.... jaclaz

It seems like it happens when some settings in BagMRU are corrupted, moreover it seems like there are two different "Search Result" views, depending on how the Search is started. See if anything here: http://www.programdoc.com/1028_14353_1.htm works for you. Do you have the "Relevance" column when running (from the Run on the Start Menu)?: explorer ::{e17d4fc0-5564-11d1-83f2-00a0c90dc849}try setting it as you want and close it, then re-run the command did your settings "stick"? You may want to try re-setting all custom folder views, the hive may be partially corrupted or "filled up": http://www.liutilities.com/products/registrybooster/tweaklibrary/tweaks/11093/ http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/33220-45-removing-bagsmru-registry (of course you will need to re-apply settings) jaclaz

Try some plain commands: WMIC Path Win32_LogicalDiskToPartition Get Antecedent, DependentOr a: WMIC Path Win32_LogicalDiskToPartition Get Antecedent, Dependent /Format:tableOr a: WMIC Path Win32_LogicalDiskToPartition Get Antecedent, Dependent /Format:csvMaybe you have not the "default" output of the WMIC command? jaclaz