jaclaz

@jumper It sounds "queer". The size of the sections and of the section headers per documentation are fixed, 1B0h is 1Ch (28) before the calculated 1CCh, which is at relative offset 10h+3=19, so your 1B0h seemingly falls before the beginning of the 386 section, right into the section header. AND "Close on Exit" should be in the Basic section, at offset 63h. and it should be 10h as value, not 01h Post a .zip containing your y.pif and z.pif, I would like to have a look at them, comparing with the files RainyShadow posted. jaclaz

No, rest assured, the WPA (or whatever it is called) compares a sort of inventory of the connected hardware at activation time with the current one, the list and then cast "votes", what hardware pieces are used is known/documented, JFYI: http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.php See also: https://msfn.org/board/topic/161662-nic-and-wpa-votes/ jaclaz

Corrected previous post, I read the document incorrectly, it is accurate. Re-checked it. The 0x1CC is correct. The four byte value is at offset 0x10 from the beginning of the section, since the 0x04 is the most significant byte, it is the fourth byte, i.e. there are 3 bytes before it. The section begins at 171h+16h+16h+6h=1A3h (basic section+basic section header+first section header+first section length) To this you add 16h for the second section header, 10h for the relative offset in the section and 3 for the relative offset inside the 4 byte value: 1A3h+16h+10h+3=1CCh jaclaz

The linked to doc uses lengths of the section (excluding titles) and some lengths within section seems wrong (possibly something has changed in the format) and there is some 00 and 20 (SPACE) padding, but all in all the 0x1CC offset is fine. jaclaz

Good. The 04 seems right, the offset is - pardon me the pun - way off, but if the byte is there it is there (and the mentioned doc is not at all clear in the way it provides offsets or I am very bad at calculating them, maybe sections are in a different order from what seems to be described). BUT I checked the files, and the offset is actually 460 decimal i.e. 0x1CC that makes a lot more sense, I will try later to re-calculate if it matches. jaclaz

Most probably (but should be tested) it is the 04000000h value in the bitmask at offset 010h of section Windows 386, marked as "Not automatically offer transition in a MS-DOS mode" in the linked to document, which sounds like a "reversed" description of "Suggest MS-DOS mode as necessary". @RainyShadow If you have time/will can you make: 1) two copies of a same .pif 2) save a copy of the .pif with the setting enabled 3( save the other copy of the .pif with the setting disabled 4) compare in a hex editor or run fc /b against the two files jaclaz

AFAICR, the properties you are setting are connected to .pif files. They are like the least documented MS files ever, the only document I ever found that deals with them is here (via Wayback Machine): https://web.archive.org/web/20220214185118/http://www.smsoft.ru/en/pifdoc.htm (no reference to what works in ME, though). There could be two possibilities: 1) the ME simply does not respect/read/parse the setting in the .pif file 2) the ME respects/reads/parses the setting correctly BUT the editing interface misses the setting Of course if it is the 1st case there is very little that can be done, but if it is the 2nd there may be ways. Have you tried creating the .pif in Windows 98 and then trying running it unmodified in ME? ( you would need another system or a VM runnning 98) Or creating a "same" ..pif under 98 and under ME and compare the actual files to see if there are differences (and if they are in the relevant areas according to the provided doc)? jaclaz

@Wunderbar98 JFYI, not really, it depends on a number of factors, on brand/model and what not, most (if not all) laptops that are "recent enough" won't have a BIOS access password reset by taking the CMOS battery off, some may still have a jumper to reset passwords, many will need specialized hardware, to either re-program or downright replace a chip: https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001302.htm @ frank woolf We need to know the EXACT make/model of that laptop in order to be able (maybe) to provide you with some specific advice. jaclaz

... it may sound strange to many people, not too. Your comparison does not really apply as Microsoft is a collective of people that changed over the years, and historically in many cases made new versions that were objectively terrible[1], Nuhi is always himself, the appearance of the tool may well have changed and be terrible (too light) for the eyes (BTW like many apps in the "washed down" Windows 10 interface), but I doubt that this may qualify it as "crap" and that it fails to do the whatever it is supposed to do. I never used either Vlite or NTlite (and only briefly used Nlite) so cannot really express a personal opinion on them, I was only trying to provide a possible explanation. jaclaz [1] compare with the move of the short sighted bishop (or of the limping knight): https://msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/?do=findComment&comment=996327

Maybe you miss some of the history behind nlite, vlite and ntlite. They are (were) developed all by the same person Dino Nuhagic (Nuhi) and (at least up to nlite and vlite) with support from MSFN members. So - once said that de gustibus non disputandum est - I think it is understandable that to many people on MSFN it may sound strange that a new product re-written by the same programmer (with many added years of experience in the specific matter) may suddenly become "crap". jaclaz

From what I have seen, besides the MS fanfare, the best definition so far is by Vinifera here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/183672-windows-11-validation-os-first-impressions/ if even diskpart doesn't run in it, I wonder what the highly specialized technicians on the factory floor would use it for. Maybe it is just an early/preliminary release and the good MS guys will fix it in the future, but personally I am not holding my breath waiting for that. jaclaz

JFYI, a hdd caddy is usually not an external (USB) enclosure, it is a replacement for the (internal) CD/DVD drive, it looks *like* this: https://hddcaddy.com/en/content/6-what-is-hdd-caddy https://hddcaddy.com/en/accesoires/175-sata-hdd-caddy-95mm-universal.html jaclaz

The issues are usually not related to the actual printer drivers, Brother's (as printers) are compatible with many "generic" drivers, if I recall correctly they are fully HP compatible, but the scanner (and the PC-FAX) part and some other "advanced" features that might be problematic, even if they are TWAIN compatible. There is - JFYI - a (Commercial) software that was born specifically to allow people to use older scanners that have no longer drivers for new OS's: https://www.hamrick.com/ (never used it personally) that lists the MFC-240 among the supported ones: https://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/brother_mfc_240c.html#technical-information jaclaz

You can try with some additional (double) quotes, see here: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/windows-powershell/batch-file-filename-with-ampersand-amp/m-p/3284432 but cannot say if similar trickery will apply to your case. jaclaz

Very likely there is no "MBR emulation", they simply are "native" 4K sectored disks that expose 4 KB sectors, plainly MBR partitioned or however the actual USB enclosure exposes 4 KB sectors. This shifts the MBR limit by 8 times (4096/512) so that the maximum accessible area becomes up to around 16 TB. Such disks won't be bootable (from BIOS) without - maybe - a "special" loader, as most (if not all) MBR loaders assume 512 Bytes sectors. See also this other thread: jaclaz

Possibly the simplest would be plain batch using nircmd: https://www.nirsoft.net/utils/nircmd.html should have all the commands you need. Probably next (what I would use, mind you not necessarily the best idea) would be either AutoIt or AutoHotKey, as AFAICR they have many easy functions to manage wiindows. This exists (written in AutoHotKey, source included): https://sourceforge.net/projects/winsize2/ But I think there are many more "dedicated" freewares/low cost sharewares for this, though finding one with all the features you want may take some time, as I think many are single display only, anyway a couple ones: https://www.displayfusion.com/ https://toddnelson.net/ https://github.com/Todd1561/TANWindowMgr jaclaz

I missed it , I thought your post was about VSS. However, as a side note and JFYI, there is still something "queer" or at least not fully explained in XP/Explorer/NTFS: http://reboot.pro/index.php?showtopic=19746 @justacruzr2 please ignore the above link it is just a digression jaclaz

Are you talking of Last time accessed? It is a Registry setting, it is a feature of NTFS that can be toggled on/off. Check: http://shiftwiki.nl/disablentfsaccesstime jaclaz

Typically it is the MCC that fries in my (personal, little) experience, this usually results in a multi-pin chip with a burn hole on it, but if a component was missing altogether it was more likely a TVS diode (there are generally two of them on 3.5" disks, one on the 5V and one of the 12V rail), see this: https://www.hddzone.com/hard_drive_pcb_components.html but it cannot logically be the TVS as if the component is missing there is no short anymore, and your PSU didn't go in over protection mode: https://community.wd.com/t/hdd-tvs-diode-faq/14692 maybe the TVS actually fried and *something else* (a nearby component) popped off. jaclaz

No you weren't, you probably had a different issue. There is no software on earth that can recover ANY data from a disk with the PCB "fried" (which is what happened to the OP). jaclaz

It is back online, now. jaclaz

Corollary (old Italian/Tuscany saying): "Le bestie non conoscono feste comandate" which translates roughly to "Animals don't know about Sundays or holidays". jaclaz

Due to the next 5G cellular introduction, here in Italy they are moving television to HD, DVB-T2, H265 trasmission . While at home it is possible (but not easy particularly for the older people) to retrofit an external decoder to most "old" TV's , the only possible way out for (say) hotels, hospitals and similar (short of throwing away and buy new tens or hundreds of otherwise perfectly working TV's, many only 3-4 years old) is to install a "MUX", a sort of centralized converter that AFAICT has a serious cost limitation (per channel). Roughly we have some 200-250 channels (of which - maybe - 50 at the most actually *somehow* worth anything). A retrofit decoder (that has the issue of having a separate remote) is anything between 30 and 60 Euro. A new TV (non -smart, "normal", 32" size) is anything between 200 and 300 Euro. A 16 channel (yes, only 16 channel) MUX is in the order of magnitude of 2000-3000 Euro, additional channels should be around 1000 Euro every 8. Only a minority will be willing (or be able to) choose the "keep the old TV" possibilities, just think of the amount of (definitely not eco-friendly) waste that will be generated . Essentially we will be paying a "tax" AND senselessly increase electronic waste to let the kids[1] have faster and better youtube and tiktok. jaclaz [1] but not only them, many adults will have better streaming videos and football matches zoom calls that are essential for their businesses

Older versions of ccleaner should install and run on Win95 and on Win 98, should be 1.32 for Win95 and 2.36 for Win98: https://community.ccleaner.com/topic/27011-ccleaner-for-windows-95/ https://msfn.org/board/topic/178116-windows-95-support-and-software-information-2019/ jaclaz

Oww, come on , no need of any conspiracy theory . Why not 2000, WIn98 or Windows 95 (OEM 2 or 2.5) or BeOS? Someone just made a list and omitted several older or less used OS's, I just offered you a possible explanation on why the line was drawn at 8. And no, Windows (All versions) would have caused NT 4.00, Win3.x and Windows 95 first release users to whine. jaclaz