jaclaz

It should be possible to "convert" an "annex B" model to an "annex A" model. There is no actual difference in the hardware, only the firmware is different (and as a safety measure you cannot flash the "other" one by default). It may be easy or a litlle more complex if the router is V3 or later. See: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/690564 Check also this: http://www.dgteam-mirror.talktalk.net/Home.html (There is obviously a risk of bricking the router, but I don't think you have actually anything to lose in trying ) This may be of use (or may be not): http://cyberstorm.altervista.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=35 It seems like (but I guess it depends on the version v1, v2, v3, etc.) that loading an earlier firmware (Italian, use google translate): http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/archive/index.php/t-569066.html allows to make the "switch" (and the re-fash the new firmware for the "other" Annex). You could also try using a Routertech firmware: http://www.routertech.org/viewtopic.php?t=2787 http://www.routertech.org/viewtopic.php?t=2797 jaclaz

Try again The "WinFE settings" are two distinct keys: "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\system\ControlSet001\Services\MountMgr NoAutoMount=1 and HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\system\ControlSet001\Services\partmgr\Parameters SanPolicy=3 BTW the one you probably set as "4", which is seemingly : http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd799290(WS.10).aspx the new setting used for Windowstogo: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/6991.windows-to-go-step-by-step.aspx Try only with the first one, and/or try with the 3 one. Also it is possible that Windows 8 (and conversely WinPE 4.0) has "inherited" this feature of Server 2008 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/971436 You can then try to do this from the PE "as is" when you manually mount the volume: http://blogs.technet.com/b/system_center_configuration_manager_operating_system_deployment_support_blog/archive/2012/01/23/when-deploying-windows-server-2008-using-an-configuration-manager-osd-task-sequence-additional-disks-may-show-as-offline-when-the-task-sequence-completes.aspx jaclaz

This source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=drone suggests that it has an onomatopeic origin and quotes Popular Science Magazine as source in 1946. BUT, here there is a somehow more convincing ehtimology/history: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/militaryhumor/a/words.htm And now, for NO apparent reason, xkcd! jaclaz

Now it would be the right time to get some tacos delivered to you by a drone : http://tacocopter.com/ BUT : jaclaz

A couple points: Oh, yes it is. (in much more cases that you might think ) No, not yet, BTW your employees are doing exactly that, but only part-time . While using XP they still use some of their time to do some little work, the switch will happen when you will adopt Windows 8 that will help in making clicking on random web links and file downloaders the main activity . Most probably they will be able to do that "more securely" than before , and thus your data will possibly be safer, but this won't make any difference, since you will have not any data (no new data produced) to be worried about . jaclaz

More specifically any LCD screen (unlike CRT) has a physical number of pixels. That number is called "native resolution", for a 23" it is normally 1920x1080 and it is declared on the manua or can be found with the exact model. See: http://www.howtogeek.com/119117/htg-explains-why-using-your-monitors-native-resolution-is-important/ The best settings is always to have the LCD screen run at native resolution and then as allen2 pointed out, adapt the size of text, icons, etc. to fit your likings. The settings for Windows 7 (I think 8 would be the same) are in DPI, see: http://superuser.com/questions/184913/cannot-change-text-dpi-setting-in-windows-7-starter HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\FontDPI LogPixels Small (100%) = 96 Medium (125%) = 120 Larger (150%) = 144 See also this: http://marc.durdin.net/2011/07/fixing-windows-font-scaling-without.html (there may be additional issues with a few fonts that have "special versions" for different DPI) jaclaz

That's OK, as long as you won't ask WHY a few windows files NEED to be on ROOT of the optical device. Also, by starting by stating how your approach is "inalienable" you are effectively preventing people to provide you with working, tested alternatives, since you sound like a Linuxish guy, you might particularly appreciate Eric S. Raymond's take on similar matters: http://catb.org./~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#goal further expanded here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html It won't simply work. There might be a workaround by using grub4dos and mapping a "boot floppy" image, but very likely it will fail nonetheless at actual install time. BUT there is a perfectly working and tested approach by using an unmodified Windows install .iso (still mapped with grub4dos), which is what I could provide some info/links about, IF your initial approach is somehow not really "inalienable" and we can talk about it (and other ones). Yep , but we may need to ask you questions.... jaclaz

No, no, it is perfectly correct simply not the "only" way. The possible issues, briefly, are as follows: a USB stick in 99.999% (please read as 100%) of cases is set as "removable" device in factory (this can be changed in the actual controller of the stick through the appropriate Manufacturer tool but see also #4 below) and it is not partitioned. a USB hard disk drive in 100% of cases is set as "fixed" device in factory (and any "fixed" device *needs* to be partitioned, i.e. Windows *wants* a MBR on a "fixed" device) by partitioning the USB stick, you make it *resemble* a "hard disk" (but the "removable" bit of the device is still set) as an alternative to "flipping the bit" in the controller it is possible to install in the windows (or in the PE) a "filter driver" that makes the "removable" bit as "fixed" to the OS as a further peculiarity, a USB mass storage device has however some "differences" (as seen from the NT OS or the PE) when compared to an "internal" disk, (as an example you cannot normally have a pagefile on a booted from USB OS, or Windows Update will not work properly/fully) and there is one of the available "filter drivers" that, additionally to the "removable" status filters also the "external" status. Any of these "filter drivers" are presumably loaded by the OS, i.e. they "come into play" after BOOTMGR has done whatever it is supposed to do and WINLOAD.EXE continues the booting. So, if the access/change to the \boot\BCD of the internal disk is performed by the BOOTMGR, it is possible that it is *somehow* connected to the "removable" status of the device BUT there is NO way to prevent this behaviour through a "filter driver" (and possibly not even by the Registry settings WinFE uses), while IF the access/change to the \boot\BCD is performed by the booted OS, even in it's initial loading stage, then it is possible that the WinFE Registry settings and/or a "filter driver" can change the behaviour. jaclaz

It *sounds* like you are "fighting" against ADS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS#Alternate_data_streams_.28ADS.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(filesystem) and particularly with the "Zone.Identifier". Practical examples: http://www.hanselman.com/blog/RemovingSecurityFromDownloadedPowerShellScriptsWithAlternativeDataStreams.aspx http://www.msigeek.com/6220/how-to-remove-security-warning-message-files-downloaded-from-internet the latter should be the dialog you are getting: What exactly are you doing/you did? It is possible that you used *something* that doesn't care about ADS Zone.Identifier or re-sets it to a "dangerous" value. jaclaz

If I could add to the news Tripredacus just posted, it seems like everyone like the Windows 8 Phone guys and the Google/Not only Google Android guys (in their senseless desire to break things that work) are removing the possibility to have phones working as "Mass Storage Devices" when USB connected, using MTP (Media Transfer Protocol) instead. The Android guys (and I presume as well the Windows Phone ones) have their reasons (basically avoiding altering objects on a filesystem already mounted by the device OS and "live", but instead of providing one of the possible solutions (file-based or sector-based protection, temporary RAM based storage, read only access to system partition, etc.) they downright removed the possibility, making the device working only with MTP (which has a long history of failures, semi-failures) or however forcing the user to use specific tools instead of the "normal" file manager (be it "plain" explorer or another preferred one). Basically you have a device which is a Mass Storage Device, which you want to store files to or retrieve files from, and more generally treat exactly like you would treat any USB stick or SD card, etc, BUT that you are forced to treat and use like a "web storage" or "Nas", but only thorugh a given (limited) specific tool or interface. And this of course creates issues with "not-latest" OS's, like: Some reference: http://www.androidpolice.com/2011/11/18/impromptu-qa-session-with-android-engineer-dan-morrill-brings-to-light-reasons-behind-galaxy-nexus-lack-of-usb-mass-storage/ Of course each and every user of Android phones is GREATLY pi§§ed off by this, examples: http://www.androidannoyances.com/post/152 http://ficksworkshop.com/blog/21-life/113-htc-one-x-mass-storage-on-jellybean https://forums.motorola.com/posts/1c41c22485 Please understand how you have a device, you use it along your own (right or wrong, doesn't matter) way, that way works (and it is one of the "main" function or "desired features" for a "smart" phone device) and suddenly they pull it from under you through a (I belive not-so-vital) OS upgrade... jaclaz

Maybe there is a misunderstanding. We earlier talked about the Festo BionicOpter dragonfly, which you mentioned on post #6 of this thread as 1st item, and that I referenced in post #7 as "Bionicopter dragonfly". If you prefer in post #6 you gave links to two different "dragonfly" projects, one by Festo and one by Techjet, and later I posted about the (relatively big) size of the Festo one. In post #15 you posted about the second (Techjet) much smaller device and it's price. jaclaz

If the USB device is a hard disk, then it is partitioned. If it is a USB sttck it may be partitioned (even if only one partition) or be "directly" a violume (i.e. a super-floppy). If you prefer, if the first sector of the device is a MBR (and thus contains a partition table) then it is "hard disk like", if first sector of device is a bootsector, then it is a "super-floppy". The BCD is a Registry Hive, it is normally auto-mounted in the Registry as HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\BCD00000\ (I am tlaking here of a "plain" installed Vista or later), but only the one used for booting (i.e. the \boot\BCD relative to the BOOTMGR actually chainloaded by the bootsector or boot manager) should, and this should happen after the first part of booting has happened, i.e. (unless I am mistaken) BOOTMGR itself should not be able (or wasn't up to 7) to write to the \boot\BCD. This is why it is important to understand WHAT modifies it and WHEN exactly this happens. And (OT ; but for the benefit of Tripredacus ) it is not something to be actually scared of, besides being stupidly assembled in a senselessly (and mindboggingly) complex way, it a "normal", plain Registry Hive, which is BTW a filesystem (some say a half-@§§ed one): http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/why-the-windows-registry-sucks-technically/ jaclaz

Good question. Without patches/modifications you are "safe" until you get to the LBA28 limit (and need LBA48), i.e. around 128 Gib (137Gb), in practice a 120 Gb hd: http://www.48bitlba.com/ Patches (there are a couple different ones) here: BTW, you are supposed to have ALREADY checked this: and ALL threads mentioned there, before asking for help.... Particularly, in this case, this one: and ALL links given there. And yes the rabbit hole goes deeper than you might think... jaclaz

Thanks , did not know that, of course it sounds like a perfect recipe for disaster, if (as often happens) you have USB devices connected, and you are distracted by something, etc. So, the \boot\BCD on the active partition on the disk (which is not first in boot sequence) is accessed anyway by a WinPE 4 (and this is not an issue by itself, but it can be if the PC was in hibernate state and "boot from other device" via F12 is allowed). Are you talking of a WinPE 4.0 made: from AIK/WAIK from "recovery.exe" other (please specify) some reference/background for the above question: Additionally, is the USB drive booting as "hard disk" or as "super floppy"? And is it a USB stick or a USB hard disk drive? Can you try setting in your WinPE the keys to prevent automount (as WinFE uses): http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/WinFE and try again? Explanation: It is possible that the access is done by the BOOTMGR of the WinPE because the internal disk is the only "fixed disk" (if the WinPE is on a USB stick, which is normally "removable") or it is possible that it is done by the mount manager when the volume is mounted. This way we could maybe understand what actually accesses the \boot\BCD on the intenal disk. jaclaz

But still, you will not need a tiny device to detect these : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281403/U-S-Air-Force-developing-terrifying-swarms-tiny-unmanned-drones-hover-crawl-kill-targets.html BTW the idea of recharging batteries from power lines is IMHO great! And they can be lethal, not completely unlike ninja cats : @duffy98 JFYI, that dragonfly is not the same dragonfly as the one you talked about previously. jaclaz

May I ask some clarifications? You have a normal install of (say) Windows 7 or 8 on a machine. You hibernate that machine. Then how can you boot to the PE (WinPE4 in your case)? What do you do exactly to be able to boot to the (I presume added) USB thingy from a hibernated state? jaclaz

Besides the validity in the specific case , that is not a valid argument . If we start counting the things that along to "official" documentation were not possible, but that one way or the other someone managed to make happen.... jaclaz

Well, the good guys at MS should also check a bit of the background of the Author of an article, even if the article is favourable, before citing it. The MS blog: http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2013/05/10/staying-centered.aspx The Gizmodo article: http://gizmodo.com/dear-microsoft-dont-bail-on-windows-8-499085690 another thingy by the Gizmodo article Author : http://gizmodo.com/5875345/the-one-about-the-las-vegas-per-diem an opinion on the same Author: http://www.lonnypaul.com/gawkers-kyle-wagner-is-an-immature-as*****/2012/01/11/ Would you buy a used new car OS from this man? jaclaz

Well, the issue is that on this the good guys at MS cannot really copy anything from the guys @Apple. I mean, Apple has: Apple Store <- physical store, (retail outlet) Apple Store <- place on the 'net from which you can download -mainly - apps So, on the "other side", there could be: Windows Store <- physical store, (retail outlet) Windows Store <- place on the 'net from which you can download - mainly - hot air AND that would cause a trademark issue not completely unlike the Metro one : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WIND_(Italy) jaclaz

To be picky Tamy Reller seemingly said that it will "come from the Windows Store", and already at least two people on that thread protested about the fact that there is NO windows Store in the neighbourhood and that they have to drive to the Windwos Store to get the update: Now, questions are:: In which place a driving license is issued to 6 years old? Cannot they ask their mom or dad to have the 8.1 update for Christmas? (assuming that they are already grown up enough to not believing in SantaClaus anymore ) jaclaz

Only don't get a Seagate frame (they tend to have the glass become opaque suddenly after some time ). jaclaz

"Not all" means that at least one (they are actually more than one, let's call them conventionally "a few") *somehow* managed to get a stable or "stable enough" system even without using your RAM limitation patch. This latter may be the second best thing after ice cream , but not - AFAIK - the ONLY way, very possibly a more "universal" solution , or if you prefere "best", but by no means "ONLY". Nothing more, nothing less. jaclaz

Just for the record, theoretically it would be possible, to have an "all in one" thingy, if you think at those 3G USB sticks they have a "modem" (please read as NIC) part and a CD part. The CD part could be bootable and contain a PXE boot stack, but it would hardl ywork on *all* PC's let alone DELL's which have a consolidated tradition for having BIOS behave "strangely". Let's wait until RenCheill comes back to try and understand if he can provide more details. jaclaz

Check Blackviper's pages and "sets" of services: http://www.blackviper.com/WIN2K/servicecfg.htm jaclaz

Sure. B) About the senseless thread on neowin, it contains at least an interesting reference to this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/may/10/windows-8-actual-installed-base-58m which confirms substantially the calculations I made here: which - BTW as expected - were largely in favour of MS. The article additionally adds an aspect I completely missed originally, the number of people "forced" to buy a Windows 8 License but that downgrade "instantly" to 7, which would nicely contribute to explain the increase in Windows 7 usage. jaclaz