jaclaz

Here is a photo of an actual skimmer "installed" on an ATM: http://www.valtrompianews.it/files/magazine/img/skimmer.jpg and here is a video of what the "hidden camera" may record: jaclaz

No, that CANNOT cause a different size detection. jaclaz

Just for the record: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/56005-repair-scratched-cd/ But, no, the symptoms are the "wrong" one for a physical defect. It sounds much more like any of the possible anti-copy/anti-rip protections. A very suitable way to identify a problematic area is usually DVDisaster: http://dvdisaster.net/en/index.html jaclaz

Meet Guiyu: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_waste_in_Guiyu http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1870162,00.html but read also here: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/e-waste-recycling-exports-are-good jaclaz

IF both test pass, then the firmware that you should update to is SD1A, here: http://knowledge.seagate.com/articles/en_US/FAQ/207951en http://www.seagate.com/staticfiles/support/downloads/firmware/MooseDT-SD1A-3D4D-16-32MB.iso It is advised to use the .iso file (which means that you will boot from the CD and make the update under DOS, actually FreeDOS). jaclaz

ivan1214 If you recovered the data (if any) that was on the "dead" hard disk, you ALREADY succeeded :. After having recovered the data you do BOTH the Seagate "Short" and "Long" test, if any of the two does not pass, you should dump the disk and call it a day. It makes NO sense whatsoever to attempt "repairing" a hard disk that does not pass any of the two tests. If your disk did pass BOTH tests, then we'll talk about performing the firmware update (which is STRONGLY advised to be NOT - EVER - be performed from Windows, BTW). You'll need to post anyway some details on the disk, exact model, current firmware revision, etc.,etc.. jaclaz

Alll DELL's have a recovery and/or "diagnostic" partition (that is the thing that you already deleted/reformatted) There is NO such thing as "standard 13 Mb" unpartitioned space, and in any case that has NO connection whatsoever with NTFS (or any other filesystem used on any partition). Post the actual EXACT hard disk make/model and - if it is explicited on the label - it's geometry. There are some cases (quite rare) where a big OEM manufacturer to respect the "HD size" advertised in the PC specs/literature do "cap" a hard disk size to a given size. Basically they promote a product with a hard disk of 30 Gb, and they order to Seagate (or oher manufacturer) - say - 10,000 30GB disks, then the products sells, and the manufacturer has not any 30 Gb disk available, so they get another 5,000 disks that are - say - 80 Gb in size, and in order to not change anything in the install/documentation these new larger drives are "capped" to a smaller size. There are a couple ways this can be done, a "geenric" one using a HPA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_Protected_Area or a "make/model specific" one, by modifying the firmware. jaclaz

Not really, as a matter of fact that is an "outdated" version. While seemingly you cannot get latest one "standalone", the "latest for XP should be 7.4.7600.226 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/946928/en-us so, in case, that one is the one that is to be tried slipstreaming (inless there is a particular reason for wanting the 7.2.6001.788 jaclaz

Queer. ERROR 1 makes little sense, it is usually connected with permissions/access privileges or "file in use". Which OS are you running it under? Would it be possible for you to try with a XP? I know it sounds "crazy, but there are at least a couple reports of a similar behaviour on "more recent" NT based systems: http://www.visualbasicscript.com/fb.ashx?m=54611 http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-files/the-target-volume-does-not-support-symbolic-links/b825791f-451a-40b0-9bd7-14f6348bbb60 If you run robocopy with the /LOG option do you have any additional detail? jaclaz

I will risk some (CLEARLY OT) considerations. After the BADD ("Big Adobe Data Defraud") comes the FUDD ("Frankly Unneeded Dumb Dissertation") http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2425254,00.asp Thank goodness, someone has still some common sense, and more than that some good sense of humour : http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/10/adobe-to-announce-source-code-customer-data-breach/ jaclaz

Sure , the suggested idea was only that informational, error or warning messages should be "objective" and "impersonal" and not express opinions (which may well be diverging). jaclaz

Or, better, "Congratulations, you are going to install a good, slim 32 bit operating system and you are smart enough to having been not convinced by all the fluff about the 64 bit OS, which is in most cases the exact same thing as a 32 bit one, only bigger, needing more RAM and prone to issues with 32 bit tools (which is what you will actually run on it 95% of the time)". jaclaz

Which filesystem is the "target for extraction" disk? Is it by any chance *NOT* NTFS? (the error seems to be an issue with the "target", it is possible that the orginal DVD makes use of symbolic links and that the target - sau it is FAT32 does not support them or that *somehow* they cannot be "translated"). Can you try with Robocopy or with STRARC? http://www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html/ jaclaz

This prompts IMHO a "side" question. I don't get it. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2686509/en-us Has anyone ever loaded a keyboard layout files from untrusted location? Seriously, I cannot even think about what a possible scenario for this is. The article refers to: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms12-034 which (about the keyboard layout issue) refers to: http://www.cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2012-0181 So, it seems that the issue is actually a LOCAL user that could gain privileges. Not something I would lose my sleep about. jaclaz

Well, besides failing to understand WHICH "that" you tested, and WHAT is "the rest" that was covered by "that" , happy that the issue - whatever it was - is solved. jaclaz

i am not too sure about the "initial user name" , BUT for Name and Organization: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310441/en-us Maybe you mean the actual name of first profile/user, if it is that just create a new user/profile and delete the old one, see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/151512-how-to-delete-all-logins-and-pass/ @MrJinje Certainly wiping the disk is effective , though in this specific case, it seems to me like this is not an "old" install to be "recycled", but rather a "brand new" install (on a wiped disk) that needs to be "anonymized" and then "personalized". jaclaz

In a nutshell 7z is the extension for the compression format that is very popular among those who want a more efficient than zip compression and don't want to pay for WinRar, but that is anyway very popular not only among them. It is freeware and Open Source : http://www.7-zip.org/ and doubles as an almost orthodox dual pane file manager. jaclaz

Well, actually you really can have an hybrid MBR/GPT disk : http://www.rodsbooks.com/gdisk/hybrid.html just like you can have an automatic transmission with the option of being used as manual. like: http://wikicars.org/en/Semi-automatic_transmission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manumatic Mission accomplished! jaclaz

@MrJinje Well, searches (at least on NTFS) should be almost instantaneous (of course not with Windows Search). JFYI (if you haven't seen Ultradefrag and JKdefrag before it is unlikely that you know about this relatively new kid on the block : , Swiftsearch): http://reboot.pro/topic/18855-windows-file-search-utility-that-is-fast/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/swiftsearch/ I am pretty sure that you can appreciate the differences between the "standard" defrag and a more advanced tool , what I was saying was that once "beyond" the "standard" defrag, the comparisons between the various more advanced tools (particularly those where file placement strategy can be chosen/programmed) is not easy at all. jaclaz

As expected the initial question was a "generic" one and making use of "fake" data. As an example the following answers the original question, but it won't help you with the actual GOAL that you have (which was already changed). @ECHO OFFSETLOCAL ENABLEDELAYEDEXPANSIONFOR /L %%? IN (1,1,2) DO SET /A?=1&FOR /F %%§ IN (file%%?.txt) DO SET %%??!?!=%%§&&SET /A?+=1SET /A?-=1&FOR /L %%? IN (1,1,!?!) DO ECHO !1?%%?!,!2?%%?!I would advise you to state EXACTLY and including ALL the details, the actual GOAL you have, provide as much background about the question as possible and provide some "non fake" data. jaclaz

WHICH identifying information? jaclaz

WHICH "hidden" partition? (you didn't list any). Your disk is clearly MBR (otherwise Windows XP won't boot from it). The choice between MBR or GPT is presented when the disk is to be "initialized". There is no real reason to have a GPT disk for a 1 Tb disk. #5 is however not easily doable, you will need to change Disk Signature (and drive lettering in the Registry). jaclaz

Very, very different from the defrag C: -a -v suggested in the given link : http://www.howtohaven.com/system/vistadefragmentation.shtml jaclaz

Sure , VirtualBox should do alright, cannot say about WINE. If you install an XP inside a Virtualbox and connect to it the \\Physicaldrive (the "old" 80 Gb), you can run in XP WINNT32.EXE with the adequate parameters: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/77526-installing-xp-on-vaio-wo-cd-or-floppy/?p=527214 The "offline install" approach should be the easiest/most straightforward. SInce it is a "really" old machine you shouldn't have issues with SATA drivers (I am presuming that the machine and the 80 Gb disk are IDE/PATA). jaclaz

Something else, set apart your fair certainty? http://www.howtohaven.com/system/vistadefragmentation.shtml The "issue" is that anything where fragments are 64 Mb or more is considered "contiguous". @MrJinje Have you actually read what is listed as "Pro"? on that site: Seriously, before starting the usual flamewar about which defragmenting utility is better, there are several freeware ones available, besides running a ful defrag from command line, more or less each of them does what is needed, and the actual differences in results between any two of them are one of those things that only a few experts may (please note the dubitative form) be able to understand/benchmark/compare properly. Other well known tools are: http://ultradefrag.sourceforge.net/en/index.html http://www.kessels.com/jkdefrag/ jaclaz