jaclaz

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

Just to point out the obvious, before the $ 5 rebate the PNY one is listed as being $ 12.99 on the Amazon page you found, this should tell people something about the "Regular $ 24.98" on the WalMart ad: ... and here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/715546-REG/PNY_Technologies_P_FD32GATT03_EF_32GB_Attache_Flash_Drive.html is again 7.99, Staples has it at 6.99: http://www.staples.com/PNY-Attache-3-32GB-USB-20-USB-Flash-Drive-Black/product_917069 Maybe - just maybe - when you can have something from several vendors for between 7 and 9 bucks, its actual market value is between 7 and 9 bucks. jaclaz

So your policy is "Someone got it, so I must get it too" ? Naah, personally my policy is to stay waaaaay clear of any OS that is actually supported by any version of Aeroglass (of course not because of Aeroglass, which is IMHO a very nice little tool ) only because those OS's are largely senseless. More generally (and still personally) my policy is "calling things by their name", even when this makes me appear as a grumpy, old, bastard (which - since I actually am an old, grumpy, bastard is NOT a misrepresentation ). jaclaz

You are welcome. I would guess that the point is not really where (or if) it is written but rather if this actually happens (as reported here by n users who have donated). You could (temporarily, just as an experiment) try leaving the watermark (in a "non-experimental" release) even if a donation key is found and see how much gratitude people that actually donated would show on MSFN..... In any case, without deleting anything, you should be able to move all the "license related" posts from this thread to a new, separate one. jaclaz

Hmmm. All these years using Opera and User Mode vs. Author Mode does not make that particularly "new". jaclaz

Actually it *somewhat* does: http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/netsh_int_ip.mspx?mfr=true though not in an extremely "clear" manner. AFAIK gateways are in a given order and the first one is what is used, the second is is a "fallback" device that only is used if the first fails and so on.... The routing table (if any) is what is otherwise used for choosing the gateway to be used, and here comes (again) into play the metric: http://serverfault.com/questions/59442/routing-decision-when-there-are-two-default-gateways-on-windows https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc779696(WS.10).aspx http://blog.palehorse.net/2009/08/24/using-windows-7-with-multiple-gateways-and-dhcp/ jaclaz

Well, let's say that if someone actually READs what has been written on MSFN, he/she might get that impression , I mean : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173139-read-first/?p=1090811 About adacom I completely disagree with dhjohns and Kel , there is not (yet) a Law or board Rule preventing people from expressing their own opinion on something, the point here (as bigmuscle stated) is that adacom's opinion has been already expressed several times and going over it again again and again is a bit tiring. But by the same token, bigmuscle's obsession about insisting to call NOT things with their name is tiring, but all in all the good thing is that it creates a nice, symmetrical situation. More or less it goes like: It's nagware.No it is not, it is donationware.No, it is nagware.No you are free to donate.No I am not as I want to get rid of the watermark.But you donate to support the development, not to remove the watermark.But since when I donate I get rid of the watermark, I am not donating but buying the privilege of removing the watermark.No, you are donating because you want to support the development of the tool.No, I am donating to get rid of the watermark.That's your problem, donation is for support of development.But it effectively removes the nag.But this happens because you supported the development.Not really, this happens because I payed for a license of it.No, you are not getting a license, you get consideration for having contributed to development.So it's nagware.No, it is not, it is donationware. jaclaz