jaclaz

I downloaded the setupcomplete.cmd. (and the autounattend.xml) Please consider how one should NEVER post a .exe, .com, .bat or .cmd "directly", but ALWAYS put them into an archive (.zip or .7z) as someone may inadvertently double click/execute them. In a nutshell it is this snippet, right? <SynchronousCommand wcm:action="add"> <CommandLine>cmd /c start /wait rd c:\apps /q /s</CommandLine> <Description>Cleaning Up Directories</Description> <Order>98</Order> <RequiresUserInput>true</RequiresUserInput> </SynchronousCommand>The syntax for RD is: http://ss64.com/nt/rd.html RD [switches] <pathname>i.e.: RD /S /Q <pathname>and not RD <pathname> /Q /Ssee if that is the issue. jaclaz

Well, no matter WHY and HOW that happened, I would try first thing to configure the first image in the .wim with flag 9 . See here: http://theoven.org/index.php?topic=509.0 jaclaz

It is not at all clear to me your setup and the actual disk order. And it seems to me like you are installing the Windows to the D: drive (while normally this is done to the C: one). Can you try to explain/detail the general idea and setup? If you boot from the USB, normally that device would be disk 0 (first disk) and the internal disk would be "shifted" to disk 1 but disk order in PE's is somewhat not "reliable", disk order (and consequently drive lettering) may change. It is very possible that this happens, as a rule of thumb it would be "better" to check the environment (and disk order and drive letters already assigned) at the time you run diskpart.exe. Something *like* this: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/10905-change-drive-letters-to-your-liking/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/123929-updated-batch-file-for-ordering-drive-letter-shifting/ is normally useful. As a side note (and only marginal) there is no need to have a separate diskpart script, it is possible to embed it in the same batch file, see (JFYI): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/126069-updated-on-feb-27-2011-ordering-messed-drive-letter-batch-file/?p=817142 http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/126069-updated-on-feb-27-2011-ordering-messed-drive-letter-batch-file/?p=817388 jaclaz

In the case of Linux, it can be even worse than "modern" style, in some cases (Ubuntu) , see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/page-133#entry1043129 http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/?p=1043219 jaclaz

No, until you go forward and proceed (as in the tutorial) with a system restore (steps #9 #10 #11). That will erase everything by overwriting with what was on the PC in factory. DO NOT do it, for the moment. Till #8 you are simply in what is called "WinRE" Windows Recovery Environment, a sort of minimal OS on which you can perform a number of activities, like as an example from command line check the consistency of the filesystem or copy to external media files, etc. Your laptop, from what you posted and from the mentioned Gateway page should be setup (roughly) like this: First partition <- no drive letter <- WinRE and "factory image" Second partition (active) <- drive letter C: boot and system volume containing the Vista OS Third partition <- drive letter D: a partition to contain Data Right now the C: partition has issues. Since it also contains the files actually executed to check the filesystem integrity (CHKDSK, etc.) it is possible that the Drive D: is OK, but that since something in wrong in C:, the checking of the disk cannot be performed successfully. By checking the disk from the WinRE environment we can see if the D: is OK (very possible) and hopefully even diagnose and fix the C: volume. You should consider the WinRE environment the same as booting from another media (install CD). jaclaz

Yep, follow the linked tutorial on Gateway support page: http://support.gateway.com/s/software/microsof/vista/7515418/7515418su531.shtml until step 8, i.e. until you get to this: but UNLIKE in the mentioned tutorial, choose "Command Prompt". Post if you can get to there. jaclaz

Those are symptoms of a corrupted filesystem. You do need to boot to an "alternate" OS (such as an install CD/DVD) and check the filesystem. It is possible that the issue is just with the filesystem, but it could be a (more serious) hardware issue (failing hard disk). The issue here is that if the "built in" CHKDSK is not working properly to diagnose (and hopefully fix) the filesystem problem, it may mean that one or more of the needed Vista system files is corrupted/unindexed (and not recoverable/lost). This more or less is the meaning of the error about the MFT, depending on a number of factors it may be possible to recover "everything as before" or not. Do you remember if that thingy had/has a "recovery partition"? Or post the exact model of the laptop, it may be possible to find out this. Gateways shipped with Vista normally have a "recoery systems", that you get through pressing F8 when booting, see: http://support.gateway.com/s/software/microsof/vista/7515418/7515418su531.shtml You will need anyway and FIRST THING some bootable device (a USB stick would be perfect, a CD - of course burned on another PC would do as well), AND an external disk (USB) same size (or better if bigger) as the one inside the laptop. Your FIRST PRIORITY (presuming that you have data that you haven't saved elsewhere and that you need) is to make an image of the disk "as is", BEFORE any other attempt. To be as clear as possible, even if a repair of the MFT is possible, it is also possible the steps to perform the recovery will corrupt data that currently is still accessible. Of course, if you have no data on that disk or you don't care about those, it's perfectly OK to attempt directly a repair. I don't want to scare you in any way , but consider that it might be a complex procedure, and you will need a lot of time (and patience) to carry it on. jaclaz

Shouldn't order be relevant? I.e.: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff716384.aspx <InstallFrom> <MetaData wcm:action="add"> <Value>1</Value> <Key>/IMAGE/INDEX</Key> </MetaData></InstallFrom>Shouldn't actually be: <InstallFrom> <MetaData wcm:action="add"> <Key>/IMAGE/INDEX</Key> <Value>1</Value> </MetaData></InstallFrom> jaclaz

It would have been a good question if lolnousernameforyou had not already posted ALL details on the hard disk (including it's size) : http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163621-120-gig-slave-harddrive-isnt-reconized-by-98se/#entry1046685 A good question might be whether the motherboard's BIOS recognizes the whole size of the hard disk. jaclaz

SCOOP! A lot of people designing GUI and GUI tools are using this: http://toastytech.com/guis/uirant.html as source for inspiration, BUT they failed to understand the nature of the document and/or missed the small text: jaclaz P.S.: An interesting attempt to describe the FUTURE evolution of a few logos (compared with the past ones): http://albinopanda.com/evolution-of-logos

I thought that the link I already provided you was exhaustive enough about the use of FDISK, what do you mean by the "technical part"? A partitioning primer? http://www.bandwidthco.com/whitepapers/datarecovery/vanalysis/partition/mbr/Partitioning%20Primer.pdf Please understand how the topic is actually vast, and you self-defined yourself as "n00b", so I don't know if I will give cause some sort of "information overload by suggesting you to read this whole site: http://thestarman.pcministry.com/ AND these: http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/ http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/partitions/partition_types.html which are the "usual references" I provide when talking of booting/partitioning/filesystems. Maybe if you narrow a bit your request I can provide you with more "targeted" suggestions. jaclaz

Let's say that someone (with all due respect) who is "excited" to announce: http://blog.seanmartell.com/2013/06/27/rebuilding-a-simplified-firefox-logo/ and "happy" about the arm extending from a shoulder : ad actually thinks that these unneeded changes may contribute in *any* way to the "brand" with *any* degree of relevance, might he be the best graphic designer that ever walked on Earth, has, in my mind, automatically won a mention in the Hall of Fame for the All Time Most Superfluous Reasons to be excited or happy (or both). jaclaz

You may want to sue me for having contributed to polluting the air in your room and - though in very limited amount - contributed to the planet's increase in temperature, enlarging of the ozone hole and possibly having made a couple of passing by flies in the room sterile (this due to the know exponential trend in flies reproduction may have seriously altered the numbers in flies population in Romania and - by extension - possibly in Bulgaria and Hungary). I assure you that the advice was given with the best of intentions and I sincerely regret to have induced you into doing something you were not fully convinced of , however, the fact that instead of thanking me (and other board members) for having at least tried to help you (independently from the results) you insist on whining about this episode may allow me to sue you for moral damages. Right now I feel belittled and denigrated and seeing my good-willing efforts being so harshly misrepresented makes me sad , very sad. jaclaz

Define "normal" Win7 X86 .vhd, first thing. The entries in that BCD you posted are seemingly those for booting a Windows 7 (one of the editions that allow it) from a .vhd using the "internal" method (the one that is not available in the "lower" versions of Windows 7). That method works more or less like this: the BOOTMGR and \boot\BCD are on a physical device (accessed by BIOS)the entry in the BCD points to the rest of the system inside a .vhd (which is NOT accessed by BIOS but only by the INTERNAL provisions of Windows 7 - where available).The method using grub4dos and Winvblock uses a DIFFERENT approach. the BOOTMGR and \boot\BCD may be on EITHER the physical disk device or inside the .vhdgrub4dos maps the .vhd to a (virtual, real mode ONLY) physical devicewhen the switch between real mode and protected mode happens (during booting) the Winvblock "inherits" the gruib4dos mapping and makes it available (still as "virtual" physical device) to the Windows 7Without the EXACT set of commands you used in grub4dos there is NO way to know if there is anything wrong in them, but the point that you seem missing anyway is that for all Windows 7 knows, no .vhd is involved, and the entry in the \boot\BCD is a "conventional" one in all similar to the ones you have when you have a "normal" Windows 7 install on a "normal" physical hard disk drive, i.e. when running BCDEDIT /enum you should have something very similar to this: Windows Boot Manager--------------------identifier {bootmgr}device bootdescription Windows Boot Managerlocale en-USinherit {globalsettings}default {default}resumeobject {1f20452f-f2af-11db-9299-adf714858873}displayorder {default}toolsdisplayorder {memdiag}timeout 30Windows Boot Loader-------------------identifier {default}device bootpath \Windows\system32\winload.exedescription Microsoft Windows Vistalocale en-USinherit {bootloadersettings}osdevice bootsystemroot \Windowsresumeobject {1f20452f-f2af-11db-9299-adf714858873}nx OptInYou can use BCDEDIT (or bootICE) alright from a PE to "repair" the BCD inside the .vhd in the usual way (as long as the PE has provisions to mount the .vhd, and to assign to the volume in it - I presume it is a "normal" install - the drive letter C: ). jaclaz

#1 unless you post your script (or the relevant part of it) it is improbable that someone can guess the reason why it doesn't delete those empty directories. #4 The Partition ID of 27 does not mean "hidden NTFS" (that would be ID 17) it means "special NTFS partition". The way the ID 27 is evaluated may depend, but it is not "hidden", it is actually interpreted generally as "do not assign automatically a drive letter to it" and - just as an example - the 100 Mb partition created by Windows 7 on a "clean" install is also "27". Some (generic), not necessarily useful to your issues, notes/ideas/reports are in this thread: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128727-cant-access-repair-my-pc-option-via-f8-startup/ starting more or less from here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128727-cant-access-repair-my-pc-option-via-f8-startup/?p=950814 jaclaz

Yep , thats the idea of intermittent problems (which are the most difficult to catch). But we are not at all "mean" (or at least "meaner" than usual), really it does seem that every time any of us (BTW in attempting to help you with a problem you had actually asked help about) tries giving you a suggestion (rest assured in perfect good-faith) it becomes a several posts confrontation. I am not saying that we should be trusted on our word, but - as long as the suggestion does not involve a dangerous action, something illegal, or something very costly, you could try accepting it at it's face value. Quite frankly, whining about the Euro 6,00 that you spent in order to follow one of my suggestions (BTW to buy a "general use" kind of product that is useful in any household, besides specifically in the one of an electric/electronic/audio enthusiast AND that you used successfully on your hard disk) is humiliating . BTW this was announced: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/159009-capped-clipped-whatever-sound-with-audigy-sound-card/page-8#entry1027827 roughly one month after it was suggested: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/128807-the-solution-for-seagate-720011-hdds/?p=1025495 Besides the generic whining attitude, the reluctance or resistance (and what not) you might want to appreciate how your plan of "filtering the advices I get and follow the intelligent and plausible ones, dropping the others" completely failed. I nonetheless managed to trick you into spending Euro 6.00 for a product and perform a series of action that led NOT to a solution by cleverly bypassing your "filters" alright . In the occasion I also failed , as my original evil plan was to make you spend some Euro 22.00 (+P&H) in a complete set of three products. On the other hand, you used just one product instead of three, and maybe that means that you didn't followed my suggestion but a free re-interpretation of it, this may not be enough to prove that the original suggestion was wrong (and anyway it worked for the hard disk). Mind you, it's OK, and the general chitchat during the wait in the process (suggest, find resistance, workaround reluctance, convince, have the test performed) has been great fun. jaclaz

Well, here we like to do things in public, why should one provide privately links to public sites (possibly useful not only to you but to all the members that are - or will be - in a similar situation to the one you were)? And it is also expected that when people helps you, you try to be grateful to them (and to the other members) by reporting in detail WHAT was the solution, HOW EXACTLY you implemented it, this way another "n00b" may be able to find this thread an learn something from it. Just for the record, it seems to me very likely that you did not resolve anything, jaclaz did and you simply followed his advice. jaclaz

Well, no. We have some experience on this too: you are reluctant by definition , in order to have you perform even the easiest thing and report it takes ages (and several posts) until you are (possibly) convinced that doing it is may be useful. On each and every suggestion that was ever provided to you on this board you historically had some exception to raise, some generic whining about the complexity of doing it and some attempts to do another thing instead (because this other thing appeared to you better). There is no point in being reluctant about anything appearing in the logs, it is simple, just §@ç#ing look into them and see if there is anything or not. Since by now two days have passed since you were asked to check the logs and told how to do that in extreme detail,it must be not that frequent an issue. Or maybe since till now only the usual "oh my, it is so difficult" AND the "I don't think it will be useful" have been duly expressed and recorded, what is missing is the "what if, instead of checking the events logs, I would run xy?" step. How about making some proposal, so that I will be able to explain you how that idea (though respectable) is not something I consider useful and can shout at you "just check the §@ç#ing events logs and report"? jaclaz

Just for the record, a number of "less specialized" devices may run a NT System of some kind, I know from experience how a number of LaCIE NAS, here is one: http://www.lacie.com/us/support/support_manifest.htm?id=10271 run an XP embedded. Unibrain used to make a NAS using Windows 2000 embedded: http://www.eagle.co.za/display_product_1938.htm But the relevance of *any* update on this kind of device is zero (or very near zero). jaclaz

I will try being more explicit. Those screenshots DO NOT COME from Neptune. They are Powerpoint slides that Dvorak said he received in first part of 1999 <- read this date and remember it.. These static images were supposed to be some future improvements of the GUI that would have been available in next release (Neptune). When Neptune actually leaked (the real Neptune, near the end of the year 1999, Build 5.50.5111) it was clear how NOTHING of the contents of the previously published static images (the 2nd and 4th Charlotte mentioned) was in it: http://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=Windows:Neptune http://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=Windows%3ANeptune%3A5111.1 ONLY the "main" Activity Center (which was however some further abomination of "Active Desktop") : http://www.betaarchive.com/wiki/index.php?title=File%3AActivitycenter_5.5.5111.jpg was actually part of the build. What was published was something evidently part of an experiment that NEVER made it to Neptune. The fact that Neptune was anyway abandoned in favour of "Whistler" is another story. Now, think about it a bit. We have a gigantic corporation, which business is (or should be) writing Operating Systems (and nowadays and since 20 years Operating Systems with GUI). Don' t you think very plausible that there were tens, hundreds, thousands of experiments, tentative designs and what not and that most of them were abandoned in these twenty years? jaclaz

Good . What you posted is the (very exhaustive descrription of the actual piece of hardware (the hard disk). Now we need some description of the context and of the EXACT issue. You are running Windows 98, and the BIOS recognizes the disk, so what exactly do you mean by "Windows 98 won't recognize"? You cannot see any drive letter added in Explorer? Have you booted to "pure DOS" and tried running FDISK? What happens if you do that? One example: If the disk came from another system that ran any OS of the Windows NT family from NT 3.5 up to Windows 2K/XP or any later one, it is possible that the disk is partitioned and that the partition(s) is/are formatted in NTFS. Windows 98 won't recognize that filesystem (not the "disk") and thus explorer won't assign to it an additional drive letter. Same applies if it came from a Linux system or more geerally from a machine running *any* OS more recent than Windows 98 as win9x cannot (without add-ons, drivers and what not) recognize *any* filesystem besides FAT12, FAT16 or FAT32. Maybe this is the case (or maybe it is not) Quick FDISK tutorial (if needed ): http://fdisk.radified.com/ jaclaz

@Phaenius submix8c (or the stupid board software or BOTH ) omitted a final "l" in the posted link: http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/226084-event-viewer-open-use-windows-7-a.html then the as stupid as the one used on MSFN board software on sevenforums, instead of saying 404, wrong link, missing page or the like, silently redirects to the homepage of the forum. It can happen to everyone but you should be expert enough to understand how the link was posted in perfect good faith and what happened was just a glitch in the matrix. Rest assured that there are professionals here, quite a few "expert amateurs" and more generally people with a more than average level on knowledge on computer related matters, and all of them can help you, the point is whether they will be willing to. In any case, should you need some chill pills, just ask . jaclaz

Well, just to let you know about a relatively recent issue here. Mini PC (mini-itx). One of a set of three identical cases, bought roughly at the same time circa 2003. Two identical inside with an EPIA 5000, one with a M10000. The two identical ones were intended to be one the "main" machine and the other the (cold-swap) replacement for emergencies. The first one of the two worked alright for some 9 years 24/7, with the replacement of a couple hard disks and PSU's over the years. The second one, being the replacement machine has worked in the same timeframe of roughly 9 years, maybe 8 hours/month. The one with the M10000 worked "normally" say 8 hours by 5 days a week (and also had once the PSU replaced) Changed PC's and decided to re-use the old ones for other things. I happened to want to use the (less used) 5000 motherboard for a "silent" multimedia PC (actually I wanted to make a router, but I had to chnage hardware for a number of reasons that don't belong here), and happened to have a spare (coming from a "bulk" set of things I bought in a shop that was closing) brand new M10000, so decided to make a "cold-swap" replacement for the M10000 using the old case (as said very rarely used and identical to the other two) with this motherboard. No problem with the 5000 in the silent PC, but when the "main" machine failed and it was time to cold-swap with the spare M10000 a new problem arose. The thingy decided (but only *sometimes*) that it had a second serial and parallel port and that the IRQ settings were conflicting. The result was that - say once a week - the user could not print because the connected printer was lost (and since she had no Admin privileges could not re-install the driver). A reboot and a re-install of the driver got rid of the issue and the fix would last approximately one week of use. After researching, I found some obscure reference about certain models of HP printers causing this kind of issues sometimes when bi-directional printer ports (or cables) were defective. I changed the printer (and cable) with an identical unit(I simply love the idea of having ready to swap units ). The problem went away. But only for a couple of weeks. So I decided to try disconnecting the second hard disk, floppy and DVD reader from the power supply (the second hard disk was a backup disk, which I replaced using temporarily a self-powered external USB). The problem went away. This time it actually stayed away. : Replaced the PSU, reconnected everything as before, no issues anymore. So, the "without reason" is - to say the least - "with some reasons deriving from experience". JFYI: jaclaz

Well, as usual Paul Thurrott is somehow mis-representing reality. I do remember the leaked version of Neptune. But it must be "placed" in the exact time period. There was an aging OS/Platform, which was DOS/Win9x, targeted to the home user and the gamer and a newish (strangely excellent) brand new platform, which was NT. NT is/was such a good thing that it still lives today in each and every MS released OS, I will repeat how a not-trivial part of my personal knowledge on 2K, XP, Vista , 7 and now 8/8.1 comes from the experiemce made on NT 3.5 and 4.0 (the OS still basically the same or at least uses the same - sometimes perveted - mechanisms). The idea at the time was evidently that since the "home PC" had now enough "power" to run the (much more demanding) NT, to unify the two families (BTW senselessly forcing upon home users a number of features only suited to business) and save money (for development and support). This is what was later done with XP, managing in one single move to have all the "business" users disgruntled by it's playful looks (when compared to good ol' NT 4.00 and 2K) and all the home users disgruntled by the all new complexity (when compared to 9x/Me). No surprise that they tried somehow to provide an easier interface to the complex system beneath, but the screenshot Thurrott provides are deceiving in the sense that the actual Neptune was all in all a "plain" 2K with some bells and whistles added (not completely unlike what XP later was) and nothing of any relevance or "revolutionary" in the UI was actually changed. Check these series of Neptune screenshots: http://neosmart.net/gallery/album/view/os/Neptune/ try to tell me that you can distinguish at first sight them from a 2K or an XP. Now re-read what the now evidently aging Paul Thurrott wrote at the time: http://web.archive.org/web/20010828175222/http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/windowsxp_gold.asp It was "fluff" in 1999, it remained "fluff" in 2001, now besides remaining "fluff" it becomes misinformation! You will appreciate the kind of misinformation that can derive through the leak of a bunch of Powerpoint slides (which curiously re-connects us with the the recent Snowden case, of which all we have seen are a handful of - BTW lousy - Powerpoint slides). I have always argued that PowerPoint (actually the decerebrated people using it) is actually the root of all evil, and this is nothing but the nth confirnmation of this. jaclaz

Follow the Standard Litany: http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/problem-report-standard-litany.html Our ESP powers tend to be on the low side on the 7, 14, 21 and 28 of each month (and crystal ball is in the shop for tuning - AGAIN ) jaclaz