jaclaz

Unless I am mistaken that disk (ST2000DM001) is a 7200.14. What we have is some (limited) information about the 7200.11 (originally intended for a specific issue) and the later finding that the same procedure may work as a form of "general" reset when a disk (still 7200.11) bricks itself for other reasons. Later experiments revealed that (with a needed added step of shorting the "read channel") the same "general" reset worked in *some* cases of 7200.11 ES that were bricked for *some* reason. Even later we had a few, incomplete , confused , unconfirmed (and possibly void of any validity) reports that the same procedure worked for the 7200.12 model. Your 7200.14 may need a completely different procedure (IF such a procedure exists, i.e. IF it is fixable in a DIY way) and we don't even know in which state it is and what caused it. You may want to try asking for assistance on hddguru: http://forum.hddguru.com/ (though with 99.99% probabilities you will be told that you should not do it and go to a professional) or, with more possibilities to get a valid answer, here: http://malthus.zapto.org/index.php where some of the more friendly guys with some experience with hard disk usually hang around. jaclaz

My impression is that the flaw is before and outside the complete lack of "sensibility" towards customs feedback. See this "old" article: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2012/07/microsoft-downfall-emails-steve-ballmer.print A pyramid built along Peter's principle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle is already bad enough, but when the only chance for a "brick" of the pyramid to move up is to become a yes-man (or yes-woman) and you assemble "clusters" or "departments" (keeping the information exchanged between them to the bare minimum) and put them on purpose one against the other, that is not for the survival of the better, it is the survival of the one that can better surf over the waves at every major storm AND that can manage to float until the next storm arrives. jaclaz

IMHO it is mainly FUD. Of course if you connect to the Internet "directly" (i.e. without a NAT AND with Windows firewall disabled/not configured, it may happen), BUT: https://isc.sans.edu/diary/Survival+Time+on+the+Internet/4721 Everything originated AFAIK from this publication: http://cayfer.bilkent.edu.tr/~cayfer/xpsurvivalguide.pdf and from this Thesis: http://pi1.informatik.uni-mannheim.de/filepool/theses/diplomarbeit-2007-itzel.pdf I would say roughly 95% metropolitan legend, 5% facts. jaclaz

Which only means that submix8c as well doesn't really read and follow links posted before , WHAT is the sense of providing a second resource with the SAME contents? (besides showing off a bit, I mean ). To recap: jaclaz found a specific post where user archer proposed a way to force uninstall and posted the link: http://www.sevenforums.com/browsers-mail/313056-unable-uninstall-ie11-install-did-not-complete.html#post2606775 to it OP ignored this suggestion or falsely affirmed how it was already tried and that it failed submix8c ignored BOTH jaclaz post and the OP reply and re-proposed the SAME method gathered form a different place OP ignored that as well OP later "found" the same link as originally posted by jaclaz jaclaz (who is notoriously an extremely picky kind of guy) highlighted how that link was not actually "found" by the OP submix8c (who is a valid runner for the 2014 pickiest guy on MSFN Award) made his move, but failed at it jaclaz

Would this do? http://www.donationcoder.com/Software/Skrommel/index.html#NoClose jaclaz

Well, no. You cannot do this. If you want some help in changing the crappy looks of the crappy Windows8/8.1 AND of the crappy MS Office 2013, we need before a signed affidavit where you state, under oath, that you firmly believe that they are crappy (as a whole) and particularly that they are crappy looking. Seriously now, your customer is right (though she may need glasses nonetheless ). http://tech-stew.com/post/2012/12/11/The-Microsoft-Office-2013-UI-A-visual-nightmare.aspx http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/290317-is-it-me-or-is-office-2013-meant-to-make-eyes-bleed http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/2013/changing-office-2013s-color-scheme/ http://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/why-is-microsoft-making-all-their-color-schemes-so-blinding.353417/ http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/office/en-US/ed1de1dc-1389-4980-acf2-aefc95947ac1/changing-to-a-theme-with-color-in-office-2013?forum=officeitpro Anyone with more that two working neurons AND not payed by MS are crying about this issue since the very release of the suite, and of course MS did nothing to make things if not much better at least acceptable (the three shades of gray choice is obviously a joke): http://office.microsoft.com/en-001/outlook-help/change-the-office-theme-HA103355148.aspx "bleak", "pale", "depressing": http://www.aidanfinn.com/?p=13854 Now the issue is that any "real" user of Office is a "real" user of Office because he/she started with an earlier (i.e. working/usable) release, and AFAIK everyone I know that had a chance to NOT use the 2013 (or 365) version of Office did so and actually continue using a previous release (be it 2000/XP/2003/2007 or 2010, and BTW my wife still daily uses the 97 version of Word and Excel with no issues whatever). All the other people (while still hating the new UI) don't use much Office anyway so all in all it seems like there was not enough motivation for any of the good tweaking guys to find a way to regain access to themes/visual adjustments of the Office UI. There are seemingly very little things that you can do to mitigate the nonsense. Though there is a project (at a very early stage) where some people are attempting a go at it: http://officethemehacker.wordpress.com/2013/09/26/darker-office-2013-theme-purple/ jaclaz

That makes 50 bucks , payable as you check out. jaclaz

As a matter of fact, and just for the record, jaclaz found it, suggesting it to you: and you affirmed how you had already tried it (without reporting about this attempt earlier) implying that it did not work. jaclaz

Cannot say if it applies, but this may help with that (or completely fail to): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171222-getting-1600-x-1200-resolution-on-a-new-pc/ I don't know if the "EDID override method works (or works the same) in 9X. Another attempt that you may want to try could be using the VBEMP: http://www.navozhdeniye.narod.ru/vbe9x.htm but if you can manage with the help of CRU (or with other methods) to use the "native" drivers is usually preferred. jaclaz

Sure it is , and that is exactly the point. You like it? Good. Get it and comply with Bigmuscle's (perfectly legitimate) requests OR learn to live with the nags. You don't like it? Good as well, don't get it. But whining (over and over - and over) about the way the tool is licensed and how it should be instead licensed is, besides annoying half the board members, is only very little distinguishable from a form of undue pressure/bullying against the developer. By the same token, attempting to misrepresent it as freeware offers another opportunity for the whiners to whine some more. Let's call things with their name, let's clear how they are not up for comments/discussions and hopefully the whiners, might be able to get a life and stop the senseless bickering. jaclaz

Well, the only thing that Aeroglass is not, is "freeware". It is not free as in "freedom", nor it is free as in "free beer". It is a crossbreed between "nagware".and "donationware", but at the end it is a "shareware" in the "nagware" form. There is nothing inherently "bad" in a "nagware", the tool is the result of Bigmuscle's work , and he has all the rights in the world (plus one) to manage the distribution and donation, and amount of nagging and pretty much anything else related to his tool whichever way he sees fit , but let's call things with their name. jaclaz

The announcement that was never made .... http://www.overyourhead.co.uk/2002/10/microsoft-announces-ads-for-bsod.html jaclaz

Hmmm. Heyplfflfpffblfpfflfbt! jaclaz

Is it a 9200SE or a 9250? This should do: http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/archive/radeonaiw-98me But try also yourself from here: http://support.amd.com/en-us/download both the 9200 and 9250 choice leads to the same "Catalyst" drivers. These are the "generic" ATI drivers, I don't think that Powercolor had "peculiar" drivers, most probably they shipped the card with an earlier version, like the 5.2: http://forum.oldversion.com/archive/index.php/t-3991.html http://www.filewatcher.com/m/wme-8-03-98-3-050117a-021000e.exe.15118152-0.html jaclaz

Yep and that would be a good answer to non-asked question #2 . jaclaz

Not really-really. The wise human being needs to know the answers to all these questions and then decide to completely ignore those that are not what he/she wants to hear . jaclaz

Point is what was the question the OP did not ask like : How do I manage to use on a standard XP the updates intended for Windows Embedded Standard 2009? If I buy a license for Windows Embeeded Standard 2009 will it be fully compatible with my apps (that run OK under standard XP)? What is the best way to run a gang of stubborn applications that need a Windows XP environment, while having them patched?jaclaz

Yeah, you should tell this to the Unity guys: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/page-211#entry1071513 jaclaz

Is this still connected to the old thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/171878-boot-to-gui-windows-and-not-dos/ What do you mean by "the drive is fine" and "I tried formatting the drive on another PC but no luck"? jaclaz

Naah, no need to blush, on these "early" motherboards *everything* and the contrary of everything is possible. I will give you a link to a case that seemingly only boots to a partitioned hard disk like device BUT maps it ONLY as superfloppy device : http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?s=&showtopic=14181&view=findpost&p=121665 http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=18485 @supernova777 If you want to make a few tests with makebootfat, this might be of use: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=13784&st=44 and these for FBINST: http://reboot.pro/topic/7932-create-universal-flash-boot-disk-with-fbinst/ http://reboot.pro/topic/11463-fbinsts-automated-script-by-maanu-now-working-for-win7/ http://www.rmprepusb.com/tutorials/usbutils jaclaz

Sure . The commodity (which however is replaceable to a certain extent by using *any* hotkey program) is the following (in my perverted mind ): I am going to use a cmd prompt window most of the time I have my hands on the keyboard in a command prompt window one needs to use the keyboard to interact with the system by pressing a hotkey combo (Alt+\ in my case) I open the dropdown command prompt AND I already have the "focus" on it's command line then I type in it a command and get the result then I press the SAME hotkey combo and the cmd prompt "vanishes" (but if I re-press the key combo it gets back still with the result of the previous command) when the cmd window is "wrapped up" focus (cursor) is returned to the app I was working with before step #4 aboveConsider how in all the above I have NOT touched the mouse, nor moved my hands from the keyboard at any time. jaclaz

Wouldn't EXPAND.EXE do nicely for both CAB and MSU? Recent (today) thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/172046-solved-how-to-get-to-the-actual-files/ For DISM, a comfortable way is to get it without downloading the whole WAIK: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/156869-get-waik-tools-wo-downloading-the-huge-isos/ jaclaz

NO, NOT a super-floppy! The USB-ZIP tends to be connected to the "partitioned" kind of ZIP, AND usually *require* a ZIP compatible geometry. The "real" superfloppy ZIP's were actually a "workaround" and rather uncommon. http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/linux/zip/zip-1.html What was suggested was a "partitioned" ZIp and/or a makebootfat double effect MBR/PBR + ZIP geometry compatibility. http://reboot.pro/topic/12436-usbzipls120-booting-with-minimalist-mbr-code-and-grldr/ http://reboot.pro/topic/12436-usbzipls120-booting-with-minimalist-mbr-code-and-grldr/?p=108810 jaclaz

And, even shorter, NOONE actually suggested you to defrag one. At least myself and MikeRL were talking of defragging compacting the Registry. jaclaz

Well, then the whatever version you tried doesn't work on your OS (whatever it is, I presume Win 8.1 64 bit) or conflicts with your Chrome Browser (whatever version it is) . It is also possible that it is not compatible with any of the new updates of Windows 8.1, there is a bug still open for 8.1 but it is of a completely different nature: http://sourceforge.net/p/winqconsole/bugs/10/ Not so casually I posted originally: jaclaz