jaclaz

With all due respect , no. Not a "data point", just the X coordinates of a data point. Let's say that you want to place your "data point" on a XY graph where X is "speed, convenience, reliability" and Y is cost. What is your Y (expressed in US$)? (my guess is that it is well above the line that - being extremely cheap I would draw at 45° - X=Y - and that I call conventionally "limit of an awful amount of money" ) jaclaz

Well, edborg posted about an issue on this USB hard disk, the issues were (partially) troubleshot on this same USB hard disk and were found being related to a LBA28/48 addressing limit (on the USB bus) for this 1 Tb hard disk on the specific machine/model BIOS. Also, please bear with me , noone talked of "Windows to Go", I believed (and still believe) that "Windows to Go" is more or less a MS original "marketing name" of something that is - more or less - an "install of Windows on USB" BUT that has a different usage paradigm and also different "features". I also believe that you arbitrarily and improperly "ported it back" and "enlarged it's definition" as "Windows to go" also for 7 (which of course, since it pre-dates the actual name, is a "normal" install of Windows 7 on USB) , see: http://rmprepusb.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/add-windows-78-to-go-images-to-your.html while the "real" thing called "Windows to Go" is *something else* (and BTW reserved to Windows 8 and 8.1 "Enterprise"), more like a "workspace" and - at least in the intentions - with no access to "internal mass storage devices": http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enterprise/products-and-technologies/devices/windowstogo.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831833.aspx http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/6991.windows-to-go-step-by-step.aspx All in all (and with all due respect), it is yet another case of misnaming something (entropy and misunderstandings consequently increasing ), "yours" projects/tutorials are about installing Vista/7/8 etc. on USB devices, i..e. something different from (actually IMHO "better" than ) MS's own "Windows to Go", which BTW is a "Registered Trademark": http://trademarks.justia.com/855/21/windows-to-go-85521865.html but the good Redmond guys don't talk about it: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/IntellectualProperty/Trademarks/EN-US.aspx#W_Title as they cannot guarantee that their list (as well as a large part of their products) is actually accurate: jaclaz

On the other hand I am pretty sure that 1 Tb USB hard disk drive: is marked as Fixed device. jaclaz

You are right What about nlite 2 (The Revenge) ? jaclaz

http://www.windowsupdatesdownloader.com/UpdateLists.aspx http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/138806-get-the-links-to-create-ulz/ jaclaz

Sure , and this happens - coincidentally - when everyone (besides the few that know the involved issues with a "single disk" and already use separate devices for OS and Data) is shifting to the much faster SSD's (typically - at the moment - 128 or 256 Gb in size, with the largest ones affordable 512 Gb's, and I believe it will take a few years for "consumer grade" SSD's to go beyound the 2.2 Tb size), i.e. when there is NO *need* whatsoever of addressing 2.2 Tb on the boot/system device. BTW the MBR limitation is actually about addressing more than 2.2Tb, nothing prevents from having a BIOS (non-EFI/UEFI) capable of reading a GPT disk (that can address more than 2.2 Tb), nor to have a hybrid MBR/GPT (Apple has used this for years), or find some other solution, again these equation are not entirely true, particularly if taken as a couple: BIOS=MBR EFI/UEFI=GPT jaclaz

How?By sheer magic or using WHICH settings?The given ones? What happens if you increase both the 131400 (which is 90*1460, while the 256960 is 176*1460) to the next multiples of 1460?LIke (say):166600189800219000248200:unsure: jaclaz

I will try again : it seems like on Windows 2000 you need to have 3 (three) parameters, ALL of them properly set: GlobalTcpMaxWindowSize TcpWindowSize Tcp1323Optsjaclaz

Could it be this issue? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/263088/en-us http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc938219.aspx What happens with these settings ?: http://www.routers.com/References/Win2kTCPtuning.html jaclaz

WANTT Widely Accepted Nuhi's Trimming Tool or: WANT Windows (All) Nuhi's Trimmer Personally I would prefer "George" as a name, though . jaclaz

AND these: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album18/pic3218a.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v80/harnett65/Album18/pic3222a.jpg See here : http://55tools.blogspot.it/2014/06/set-551.html jaclaz

OT , but what about actually releasing it as "temporarily nameless nuhi's tool (Alpha/Beta)" and then ONCE it will be released, and having had a minimum of feedack/reports of successes from the Alpha and Beta testers discuss on the name to give to it, which icon to use for it (and of course make a poll on which colours to use for the icon ) Just for the record I would prefer shades of blue and green.... jaclaz

Benefits to WHOM? Like: Benefits to Intel or Mocrosoft? Benefits to the three or four companies that provided BIOSes before? Benefits to OEM's and PC manufacturers? Benefits to Software houses that can sell upgrades? Benefits to the final user?The answers from #1 to #4 are blowing in the wind . The answer to #5 is NONE (or none that a final user can perceive, if not much nicer and more graphical "BIOS Setup screens") yet. WHEN and IF the EFI/UEFI will be (hopefully): 1) simplified <- the documentation is over 2000 (two thousand) pages 2) become a "real" standard 3) the stupid "FAT32" UEFI booting limtiation removed 3) if not the three above at least a "common use" will be eventually reached, making UEFI tools portable between different hardware 4) the nonsensical BIOS=MBR EFI=GPT equations (actually connected more to the stupid Windows 8 than anything else) will be abandoned 5) programmers will want (or be able) to produce programs for the "environment" EFI/UEFI has ALL the cards to become the third of fourth best things in life (after beer, sliced bread and ice cream ), as it will be an extremely useful "real mode" Operating System, and we may start to think UEFI + a Windows NT not completely unlike good ol' DOS + Windows 9x. jaclaz

Yep, can you remember when you just setup CD-ROM as "first boot device", or simply pressed F12 when booting? JFYI: http://www.canbike.org/information-technology/2013/03/12/asus-uefi-boot-from-cd-dvd-x55u.html http://www.sevenforums.com/installation-setup/338018-can-t-install-windows-7-new-asus-laptop.html http://www.sevenforums.com/installation-setup/264491-cant-install-windows-7-preinstalled-windows-8-laptop.html#post2178898 Specifically, it seems like the good Asus guys "forgot" to provide a way to disable UEFI and enable CSM: http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/456084-asus-x551ca-boot-issue Though seemingly they managed to add some further restrictions and managed to call the chioices "Windows 8", Windows 7" under "Choosing OS": http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2033112/win8.html I just checked and 12 (twelve) BIOS updates between 2013.10.22 and 2014.07.13, i.e. 9 months must be a new record. jaclaz

Add *somewhere* "SecureBoot", and you are done. jaclaz

WHICH "amazing tool"? jaclaz

Yep: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-benchmark,3269-7.html though it is not at all clear (to me) how to choose one, they seem to have "crazy" pricing The good guys at tom's hardware managed to put in the mentioned article: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-benchmark,3269.html everything AND the kitchen sink, thus creating a completely UNreadable/UNunderstantable mish-mash. The graphic on last page, if you draw a few lines to separate "comparable" capacities and interfaces is telling me that: In the 120/128 Gb class the two "best" (imho) ones are both Samsung BUT Samsung evo 120 Gb has a slower performance that the Samsung pro 128 Gb for a price of 0.75 $/Gb vs. 0.89 $/Gb (a 16% difference) with prices ranging from $90 to $114 in the 240/256 Gb performances are much "nearer" among all makes/models and prices vary between 150 and 160 $ (a 7% variation) but since the Samsuing one which is the one priced lower at 150 $ is also the slower and smaller one, it has a price for Gb of 0.6 $ while all the others are 160 $ with a $/Gb of 0.625 (i.e. a 4% only variation) at the 512 GB class the crazyness starts, prices from 240 to 360 dollars, i.e. from 0.47 to 0.70 $/Gb (i.e. a variation of 33%So: in the 120/128 Gb class you may make your choice depending on whether you can afford or not the additional $24 per drive for some increase in speed and 8 Gb more storage in the 240/256 Gb class you better throw your dices to choose as prices AND performances are (substantially) THE SAME for all devices (i.e. you have NO choices ) in the 512 Gb class the difference in $ is so high (you can roughly get THREE slightly slower devices for the price of TWO of the slighltly fastest one ) with seemingly trifling performance differences that there is (IMHO) no race at all jaclaz

Here you are [1] See: jaclaz

@JorgeA I found the Aussie news particularly funny, we have here a proverb/old saying "cencio parla male di straccio", which translates more or less to "rag is badmouthing cloth". And of course, my English may not be at it's best, but I would have found more reassuring this sentence: if "gross" had been replaced by "any". jaclaz

But it would be interesting to know the result of plugging a SCSI wire (in either the disk or motherboard socket) . jaclaz

Yes , very often a reboot is needed to re-detect hardware, particularly after a "fix" like this one. Another happy bunny ! http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128727-cant-access-repair-my-pc-option-via-f8-startup/?p=828512 jaclaz

Sure . If you invoke notepad with the /p switch, it will 1) open the file (but NOT display it on screen) 2) send it as is to the printer 3) close the file and terminate the running notepad http://www.robvanderwoude.com/notepad.php Just remove the /p from : Or remove the whole line above from the batch if you don't want the file to be opened in notepad. Sorry for your paper (and for the trees). jaclaz

Maybe if you list ALL the tweaks you already know, one might be able to suggest one that you don't know . (just to avoiding proposing a tweak to be replied with a "thanks, but I already know about it"). jaclaz

Try connecting it "directly" to an internal SATA connector. Is it seen (in BIOS) as 0 size (LBA0) or is it NOT seen (BSY) or is it seen with it's (correct) name and capacity? jaclaz

Another huge BUMP , but related , extremely simple and possibly useful (even if not specifically in this situation) in other similar situations: http://www.pealefamily.net/tech/captrick/ EDIT: The above is no more, via Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20130429235558/http://www.pealefamily.net/tech/captrick/ jaclaz