jaclaz

Well, if it comes to this, JFYI, there are also several suitable non-linux tools. jaclaz

It seems like a large number of people have had issues with this update, which has been defined as "dodgy". A couple examples: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/ccb4eb16-6eff-4622-86d8-c262ca85b9d1/kb2930275-dodgy-?forum=winserver8gen https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2234454 According to this: http://www.gfi.com/blog/march-patch-tuesday-roundup/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=march-patch-tuesday-roundup it is also seemingly a patch for a non-issue . I mean, valid credentials + local log on, if an attacker has those he ALREADY pwns all your bases. jaclaz

And besides "security" there are possible "social" issues. Recent example: http://windowssecrets.com/forums/showthread.php/159825-Skype-permanently-online I see you are online but you are not answering my calls! I would call a "smart" TV one that allows me to zap faster, not one that takes ten to fifteen x the time my old CRT one takes to change channel.... Now OT, a previous (dinosaurish) take on the matter of "Smart appliances": http://reboot.pro/topic/9915-the-good-thing-is-that-engineers-never-stop-to-surprise-me/ jaclaz

SO it is this one? (but what Linux can "see", not necessarily is the same as what Windows 9x can) What do you have in Device Manager? Do you have a "Mouse" item? Or you have a yellow question mark? Post a screenshot. Like: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc768194.aspx jaclaz

#1 Unfortunately it is a known issue with notifications, though the good guys are working on this, since the last update of the board software notifications have worked intermittently and fail to work in some cases without an apparent reason, see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163472-ipb-update-july-2013-to-version-345-bugs-only/ #2 The issue has the same reason (stupid board software) but it should be "browser specific", namely you must be running some version of Explorer, which is known to create these issues (see the same thread above about board software bugs). http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163472-ipb-update-july-2013-to-version-345-bugs-only/?p=1068662 jaclaz

johne53 The Author of this tool has been having issues with that page(and/or generation or codes and/or *something* else) and decided to TEMPORARILY disable this possibility until he finds time to troubleshoot the issue. Unfortunately there are two threads with the same object, the present one for 8: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163725-aero-glass-for-win8-12/ and the other one for 8.1: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/170850-aero-glass-for-win81-12/ Whilst some "general info" is "common" between the two releases. On the other one, you may have found : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/170850-aero-glass-for-win81-12/?p=1070965 JFYI, there is a project by another member ogf MSFN, called StartisBack, here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163489-startisback-152/ that you may want to try. jaclaz

From the readme.txt: Is this what you did/experienced? jaclaz

Yep, as Roland Krenn perfectly put in his conclusions : jaclaz

Just for the record, newish Seagate drives have now a new limit of 350 Gs. A 16.67% completely unneeded enhancement . jaclaz

You should be a little bit harsher with yourself This piece of info has been given to you several times on this thread, that is exactly what Rloew's patches do (allow access to 4 Kb sectored drives from Windows 98) as explained in the initially given reference thread (yes the one you did not read): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/141013-hard-drives-with-4kb-sector-size-are-now-available/ jaclaz

Off topic but the buttered side of toast doesn't fall that side down, but up instead http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/buttered-toast-minimyth.htm . Sure , that's what happens when a home made robot arm lets them fall vertically from the roof of a one-storey building. JFYI: http://www.schoolfreeware.com/Why_Does_Bread_Land_Butter_Side_Down_Page_1.html Among the references, a more common scenario makes it a 6 out of 6: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/kitchenscience/exp/butter-side-down/ Robert Matthews won an Ig Noble Prize in 1996 for his research: https://web.archive.org/web/19990117001743/http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rajm/toast.htm And there are several follow-ups and experiments in the same direction, a few examples: http://kdf.mff.cuni.cz/~janek/pocitace/falling_bread.pdf http://www.improbable.com/2012/12/24/tumbling-toast-the-maths/ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:lRgkC4FahuYJ:physik.uni-graz.at/~cad/Lehre/presentation_05/Krenn_Drucklayout.pdf+%22tumbling+toast+problem%22&hl=en&gl=sh&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESioINknBvcrA2VJXWHgzSifdlsST7CyOgtuIJ3bSLOOTyIaHs_NPRdFgOui5XbYz6VuaeqEB99jjsfES3FVd2yf79eJpcMuPj2V4Ye5GFPDAKYOZvEgao7SoMkFGWW8fOMKIQne&sig=AHIEtbRdffCKk6zCWTqDDeD_xJ_KbAroig jaclaz

Sure , and using the actual wayback machine, we have proof that it has been published before May 1, 2007 (with an initial "set" date of August 18, 2009): https://web.archive.org/web/20070501183102/http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/experts.html but it is still actual, particularly in the part : jaclaz

Don't be too harsh with yourself , rest assured that a lot of people have banged their head against this particular wall and most probably lots will do the same in the future. JFYI, there is an ongoing (preoccupying ) thread about incompatibilities between Windows 8 and 7, at least when GPT partitioned, that at the moment seems to lead in the direction of these stupid 4K (or maybe only AF ) disks: http://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=11431/ jaclaz

Look, as it is evident, I posted what I believe being a (hopefully) constructive idea/suggestion, which as said was directed to Chris_R, which BTW, while disagreeing with it, received it with most nicely manners. I am not trying to start a fight with you (or anyone else for that matter), as a matter of fact I seek not any kind of interaction with you, of any kind. Of course you are perfectly free to interpret my posts in whatever way you like. I am not in any way willing (how? ) to prevent anyone from doing whatever they want to do in their free time, but I also expect noone to syndicate on what I should do in my free time. As said, good , let's hope that those words are actually final. jaclaz

Well, I can : http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/experts.html ... and that's EXACTLY the side on which it will fall , and now, for NO apparent reason, antigravitory cats: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Murphy's_law_application_for_antigravitatory_cats jaclaz

Good. The suggestions (as clearly stated) were about TWO things: modularity (which is already present in the project , and to such a granular level that one with the right knowledge can choose every single tiny bit and set it the way he/she wants it) simple ways to access these features (this is what is IMHO completely missing, and as said not particularly or only in this nice project)I understand how this second part can be not a priority for you or the other developers , though there is a difference between a "low-priority" issue or "too complex/not enough time to solve" and negating it as in "there is no issue". http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072431/quotes?item=qt0484668 bhplt expressed very well some of the reasons why it may represent an issue, and described a reasonable scenario for which an easier accessibility would be advisable for the project, but of course any idea/suggestion is only that, and everyone is perfectly free to agree with it or not (or deem it impossible to realize in practice). jaclaz

Good , then fake I never posted that suggestion (which you would have ignored anyway ), and that was BTW actually directed to Chris_R. You can bet on it (that jaclaz is "same"). The difference is that you changed your opinion on him and his contributions/suggestions. jaclaz

There is nothing to "fix". As MS would put it , this is by design. You have two possible workarounds: get the RLoew's Patches and "update" your Windows 98 System buy another USB disk, decently sized, like 320 Gb or 500 Gb MAKING SURE that it is 512 bytes/sector and live happily with it.After all your original plan was to use just 100 Gb of that 2 Tb disk with Windows 98, right? jaclaz

And, being the first one ever on this board to suggest that 8.1 can be a replacement or an alternative for 7 , I would say that spidernz is eligible to take part to the finals for "the most senseless advice on board 2014" award. I mean, one thing is getting the stupid 8/8.1 as a bundle with a new machine, and another is actually purchasing a "full" license to downgrade XP to it. jaclaz

Wait until you enter the field of video encoders/decoders/players/codec, the real "fun" is there. (I left it from desperation, judging that the time invested in understanding which §@ç#ing codec was inside which stupid "codec pack" - BTW often with malware included - etc. not worth the time needed, got VLC and lived happily since ). jaclaz

Well no. I mean you originally posted about an issue with a .ape file, not about issues with .flac or .ogg Does that download also "cover" .ape files? jaclaz

@j7n Don't forget the new XP SP2 memory limit! http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888137/en-us jaclaz

If I may , now that the Win8.1SE project is "mature" and working well, you (we, everyone) are confronted with the old - still the same - issues, that have been faced (and went mostly unresolved) on every PE building project ever attempted. There is not a "common" use of a PE. The two extremes are: 1) my personal view: a small temporary OS, the smallest the better, the simpler the better, used to recover/fix a failed system 2) wimb's view (I take him as an example as he is a much respected developer and usually knows where his towel is, but he is not the only one thinking like that): a full replacement for an installed OS, including ALL the bells and whistles (and sound and high graphic resolution and what not) Of course between these extremes there are any number of peeps thinking that a vital requirement for a PE is a nice background (or a graphical change in the bootscreen) and others that want instead a "bare" system, but capable of running (senseless) .Net applications they use, etc. etc. Both "extreme" points of view are IMHO to be respected, and as well all the ones between them . IMHO the only possible solution to have all kind of "customers" satisfied is modularity AND simple ways to access it. One suggestion maybe to have four "presets": Bare Lite Medium Fullthat already would create four "bases" more modular along the choices/preferences of different users (and different expectations from the build). But since you are now talking of separating the programs from the .wim (which is good), I would like to propose (again) an approach that has been attempted in the past but that never went "mainstream", using one (or more) separate disk images mounted on the "main" filesystem as directory mountpoints. Imagine that you have a "core" PE and a completely separated disk image that you mount through any of the available drivers, let's say IMDISK for simplicity, to a directory in the "main" filesystem, say X:\PortableApps. It would be trifling to make a separate batch, winbuilder script or *whatever* capable of creating a PSTART (or similar) menu based on the contents of such a directory "dynamically" (at boot). Such an approach would reduce the size of the "core" (allowing better use of RAM, when and if RAM is used for booting), faster booting times (as an example for LAN/Pxe booting), one could also have the possibility to connect to an image containing a smaller set of programs or to connect to a more featured one. Of course such an approach won't be useful for *all* programs, but I am pretty sure that it may make the thingy more flexible and save a lot of re-builds. jaclaz

Good , than that part is settled : and explains nicely why that drive is given as compatible with XP and 7 notwithstanding the fact that (evidently) it is a 4Kb "native" drive. It seems like in the STBV3000100 drive there is inside a ST3000DM001, see: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1711967/hard-disk-seagate-expansion-3tb-usb-hard-drive.html so, it would be "only too logical" (but logic rarely applies to Seagate ) that inside the STBV2000100 there is a ST2000DM001, and BOTH are 4K native: jaclaz

greg , it is not like I do not trust you, but I do not trust you. I asked you the INTEGRAL copy of the first 2048 sectors in your disk, and NOT the copy of first sector and of sector (maybe) LBA32. Your partition table is as follows: and though the size of the boot partition is not "normal" , that is usually 200 Mb (for the preview of Windows 7) and 100 Mb for the RTM version, in your case it is 300 Mb. , it is well possible that for whatever reason the good HP guys made it non-standard, as I have seen similar reports of 300 Mb partitions, this is similar to your situation: http://www.sevenforums.com/attachments/backup-restore/212640d1379310710t-cannot-return-computer-factory-condition-after-partition-editing-disk-management-2.jpg The contents of "sector 32" appear as "hex garbage" (as expected BTW). @all Please let's put aside the debate over BIOS vs. UEFI, as it has NOTHING connected to the issue at hand, which is about the "special" MBR CODE that allows, pressing F11 to start the recovery process. @greg, the issue is that - depending on the period - HP may have used one or the other of several third party tools to create the "special" MBR, as discussed on the already given thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/131620-hp-notebook-the-recovery-partition-could-not-be-found/ Such "special" MBR's are created for the specific machines/models and we have not found (yet) a way to reproduce them (and or even know which specific tool has been used as - as seen in that thread - over time several different tools were used by the HP engineers). Now, it is well possible that a copy of the original MBR (or of just the code of it) is stored *somewhere* on the recovery partition and can be retrieved/restored from it, and it is as well possible that by initiating the recovery procedure the whole disk (including the MBR) will be restored to "factory state". It is well possible that *somewhere* inside the "HP tools" or the "Recovery" partition there is a copy of the proprietary program that installs the "special" MBR. What it is not clear (to me) is if you are willing to start a "recovery" from the recovery partition or not. If yes, it should be possible, as said, to initiate it from a USB stick (or a CD/DVD) with grub4dos on it. If you want to try doing the recovery process, post so, and I will guide you (hopefully) through starting it. Alternatively, like in the already mentioned thread, I can try and help you install an open source bootmanager that may be able to replace the "special" MBR (but you will likely need to use F10 instead of F11 as hotkey): jaclaz