jaclaz

Again: 1) it is due to the original partitioning, the cloning is "innocent" 2) it can be (could have been) easily fixed I tried explaining the basics, if you had questions you could have asked them . Anyway: 1) the entry in the MBR is for the extents of the extended partition 2) normally the simplest way out would be to enlarge the extents of the extended partition (leaving the volume inside it as is) and later expand the volume 3) BUT in a dual-boot with XP and Windows 7 having a logical volume inside extended is not safe 4) hence it is advised to convert the logical volume to primary, since you don't need/want to ue any other MBR slot 5) this consists essentially in copying 16 bytes from the EMBR to the MBR, change the 4 byte Start LBA value adding the offset to the EMBR and (optionally) correct the "sectors before" in the PBR jaclaz

@Areba21 What you essentially want (IMHO) is a "scrambler", i.e. a bike with a lowish seat/baricentre and large handlebar, very manageable for a new driver, that runs smoothly on road but that can do even some light off road or dirt track . The original Ducati Scrambler (to give you an idea): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ducati_Scrambler The current models (1100) are stupidly powerful, the 800 is already more than enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ducati_Scrambler_(2015) the 400 is a de-powered version that would suit you anyway, no idea if these are common/affordable in CA. But there must be "similar" models from other manufacturers. jaclaz

The MBR contains (besides BIOS boot code) a "structure" called partition table. Partition addresses are written to it. There are 4 "slots" or "entries" possible in it. Primary partitions addresses are written there "directly". Extended partition address (type 0x05 or 0x0F) point to another sector, the EMBR that still has 4 slots but of which only 2 are ever used: #0 the address of the first logical volume inside extended #1 the address of the next (E)MBR Any partition (primary or extended) on any disk have addresses in the MBR, which is thus ALWAYS relevant, no matter if system or data only physical drive or partition. Now, OS up to XP aligned partitions to cylinder/head (in practice multiples of 255*63) and there is a 63 sectors offset between EMBR and logical volumes. OS Vista and later aligned partitions to MB (2048 sectors) and there is the same 2048 sectors offset between EMBR and logical volumes. IF this latter is in use, Disk Management in XP may corrupt the EMBR's. It is your disk and your data, but before giving advice, I would like to know exactly the current situation. JFYI, volumes are "colour coded": dark blue = volume inside primary light blue = volume inside extended black = unused space And the green border is around the extended partition. In the default view of Disk Manager (which "scales" the graphic proportionally to the sizes) it is sometimes difficult to see if there is unused space past the last logical volume (but still inside the extended) there is the alternate view in Disk Manager (under View->Settings) that allows to have each "item" be the same size (besides allowing changing the default colours). jaclaz

Very good . As a side-side note, since you mentioned .iso's, no idea if it applies to your nice batch, but doing a dashun9 test is IMHO not that bad an idea: https://msfn.org/board/topic/182116-winsetupfromusb-problem-installing-xp-on-legacy-system/?tab=comments#comment-1191406 jaclaz

Well, if you want, I can tell you how to fix the issue without having to move/copy delete anything. Basically all is needed is to "transform" the currently only volume inside extended into a primary partition. It can be done manually with *any* hex/disk editor (suggested is Tiny Hexer) or (still manually but easier, calculations are automatic) via grub4dos. Still, I would like to see the log/report I asked you for before anything else. jaclaz

Set the multimeter to V DC (the "=" symbol), likely you have a range selection *like* 2-20 V, or anyway select the lower V = selection that is at the higher end bigger than 12 V, then use the probes on Yellow and Black wires. Cables on ATX power supplies are colour coded, they are all the same, anyway this is the specific supernova detail: https://pc-mods.com/blogs/psu-pinout-repository/evga-psu-supernova-cables-pinout You will need a short piece of wire or a paper clip between the Green and *any* black to power on the PSU. Seemingly however some newish PSU's (including EVGA ones) use NOT colour coded cable so you will need to go by place/number on the connector, see: BUT, you won't get a definitive result , as very often a faulty PSU still provides the voltage without load, but it doesn't provide enough current, so testing only the voltage is only part of the issue. You would be better served by a specific/dedicated ATX PSU tester (you can find one of them for anything between 5 and 30 bucks, but that would be (IMHO) wasted money, unless you happen to do many repair/checks. I.e. if I were you I would get an el-cheapo (but not el-cheapest, no-name), ATX PSU 500-600 W to keep as spare and for testing, you will be spending anything between 10 and 30 dollars, i.e. roughly the same as the tester. jaclaz

I don't think that the USB connection is involved, but it may. If this is confirmed, it depends of course on the original partitioning on the 160GB HDD. It is pretty much binary, either something is a clone, or it isn't. Long discussion on the term "clone" (vs. "image", "backup", etc.: If you made a sector by sector copy, it is a clone, i,e. an exact copy. The "normal" way to partition disks was (historically) to have: 1 primary partition 1 extended partition with inside it *any number* of logical volumes because that was what DOS Fdisk would only allow. Later systems allowed the creation of more than 1 primary partition, but - generically speaking - the 1 primary + 1 extended is still very common, as there are only 4 slots in the MBR partition table, it means either max 4 primaries or max 3 primaries+1 extended (with as many volumes as needed in it). What I recommend you, should you have created the extended partition in Windows 7, is to NOT use ANYMORE the Windows XP disk manager on that disk, as even an unrelated change done through it may corrupt the extended partition (actually the volumes inside it), JFYI: http://reboot.pro/topic/9897-vistawin7-versus-xp-partitioning-issue/ "lost" volumes due to this bug can be recovered manually, should this happen, but while doable there is not a magic tool that does the recovery automatically. jaclaz

WHICH topic? This one? jaclaz

What you report is "strange", The issue may be that your "second partition" is NOT a partition but rather a logical volume inside extended. If I recall correctly the built in disk management/diskpart has provisions to extend primary partitions/voumes, but not the extended partition (that contains the logical volume). Check the content of the MBR, you can use *any* suitable tool showing its contents, if you don't have any handy, simplest would be to get MBRscan: https://www.raymond.cc/blog/5-free-tools-to-backup-and-restore-master-boot-record-mbr/2/ https://tools.security-x.fr/ Scan Report and you attach the MBRscan.log to your next post. If this is the case, it is possible to manually "convert" the logical volume to primary (if you are game for it). jaclaz

You have done nothing to be forgiven for , a glitch is a glitch , but trying to understand what is causing it might still be interesting, the fact that I only experience the glitch on posts by two people should mean that these two people's browsers, or the stupid board software adds. only in combination with these two people's browsers, for *some reasons*, *something* that causes the glitch. You'll have to concur that it is an "odd" kind of glitch. But please, do not play moderator with me, rest assured I (usually) know what is polite and (definitely) what is against the rules, a moderator will be able - if considered needed - to move our off-topic posts to a new thread, and I know what dencorso said, thank you. jaclaz

Yep, still it is strange that only posts by two people only show (sometimes) this way, I mean, there must be another huge number of users that use either the exact same Chrome 88 or the same exact recent Firefox as D.Draker (but I didn't notice anyone else's posts with this behaviour ), and while the actual rendering may be off on my old browser it is on "your side" that the "span" that Wunderbar98 and siria noticed is inserted. jaclaz

No, this post here (not the quoted part) shows "strange" (see attached screenshot): So, still, it is "curious". Which browser are you (Dixel and D.Draker) using? I remember similar issues years ago (and on another forum) about a user that for *some reasons* wrote posts in a word processor and then copied/pasted it, @D.Draker Your last post is "normal" (and the last two oes by Dixel as well), so definitely it is the combination of your browser with the stupid board software that creates the "glitch". jaclaz

I don't know. On my browser, for *some reason* posts by both you and Dixel are partially "huge". It may well be an artifact of the browser I use, Chrome, actually Iron, 43.0.2300.0, on XP SP2 (yes I know) to access MSFN. but it is "queer" that it happens only to posts by you two . Maybe you are using a same browser? I am attaching a couple screenshot to show you what I see. jaclaz

Well, do you speak Slovenian? Are you looking for a Slovenian Law in English? Anyway: https://www.rppp.si/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/20190711_ZPlaSSIED-and-PSD2-provisions-on-SCA.pdf You should look for "Zakon o plačilnih storitvah, storitvah izdajanja elektronskega denarja in plačilnih sistemih" (“ZPlaSSIED”), namely around article #153. Please do not use - unless really *needed* - huge fonts, it seems like you are shouting. Should you be, by any chance, actually shouting (at me) please stop. jaclaz

@dixel EU directives are, generally speaking, mandatory. Each state must make a local Law according to directives, and in this has the "certain amount of leeway". Thus through the mechanism of transposition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transposition_(law) each state will have a local Law conforming to the directive, which may well be slightly different but still respecting the principles of the EU directive, anyway here the issue is not even in this supposed "leeway", it is in the pratical implementation (still according to the EU directive and to the corresponding local Law) that each bank might do differently, even in a same EU country. There is no such thing as a federal law, this is not the US, it is not a federation of states, it is a community or confederation. jaclaz

The EU is as much "federal" as it can be. jaclaz

The first release was for XP SP2 and SP3: https://web.archive.org/web/20090202073512/http://support.microsoft.com/kb/955704 The filename is WindowsXP-KB955704-x86-ENU.exe. I would try looking here: https://web.archive.org/web/20130301000000*/https://download.microsoft.com/download/A/6/E/A6EFFC03-F035-4604-9FB0-3B8169ED6BB6/WindowsXP-KB955704-x86-ENU.exe Before that, there was an unofficial way: https://web.archive.org/web/20100628180626/http://www.merawindows.com/Forums/tabid/324/forumid/15/postid/35485/scope/posts/Default.aspx Files exfat.sys and uexfat.dll are version 6.0.6001.18000 (longhorn_rtm.080118-1840). jaclaz

Dixel, take it easy. The norm exists, it is called PSD2: Payment Services Directive 2 (PSD2): DIRECTIVE 2015/2366/EU (PSD2) https://eba.europa.eu/regulation-and-policy/single-rulebook/interactive-single-rulebook/5402 it is the way it has been (and will be) implemented, particularly regarding SCA (Strong Customer Authentication) which is debatable. jaclaz

Ow, come on, mobile and bank apps security is so high ... ... what can possibly go wrong? https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/12/evil-mobile-emulator-farms-used-to-steal-millions-from-us-and-eu-banks/ jaclaz

No comment needed: https://borncity.com/win/2020/12/18/windows-10-20h2-chkdsk-damages-file-system-on-ssds-with-update-kb4592438-installed/ jaclaz

Well, great minds think alike , this is my everyday phone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_1280 but, since smartphone "keyboard" is too d@mn small for my fingers (and display too d@mn small for my eyes) the portable device that always stays at home is a small, obviously el-cheapo tablet, I used to have a Chuwi 8 (nice little thingy, dual booting Android and Windows 10, but it died) and now I have a Lenovo 7" (TB-7305F) which is just about the right size. jaclaz

No. (unneeded) explanation on the matter was (anyway) already given. Since for *some reasons* I am considered in my circle of acquaintenances a cheap (but wise/expert ) old grumpy bastard friendly guy lately I have been often asked to find "best bang for the buck" solutions to this issue,, thanks also to the members that shared their opinions/experience came out as: i5 and, namely to: IBM Thinkpad M92 or M93 "Tiny" i5, 8GB, Windows 10 64-bit. 120 or 240 GB SSD OR loosely corresponding Fujitsu Esprimo, Hp Prodesk or Elitedesk small form factor PC's, i.e. something that can be easily found for anything between 180 and 240 Euro (already "refurbished" with added RAM and SSD and upgraded OS) and that came originally with Windows 7 or 8/8.1. jaclaz

Your link brings to; I.e. neither XP, nor PAE related, there is nothing scrolling down (and BTW there isn't much even without scrolling), possibly you pasted a wrong link. jaclaz

Only for the record, SVCHOST.EXE is a sort of "catch all" for services. You will need process explorer (or similar) to understand which actual service is "behind" svchost.exe. https://www.raymond.cc/blog/identify-loaded-svchostexe-in-windows-task-list/ And, possibly this will also help: https://www.nirsoft.net/utils/process_activity_view.html jaclaz

Well, Windows search sucked (and sucked big) since what? Windows XP? Depending on what you need, either Everything: https://www.voidtools.com/ or Swiftsearch: http://reboot.pro/topic/18855-windows-file-search-utility-that-is-fast/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/swiftsearch/ are more than advised, needed . jaclaz