jaclaz

Or he could well have already have run it, but pretend he hasn't just for the fun of making the little bastards on the board upset about this jaclaz

Hmmm. What about camera equipped micro-drones? http://www.businessinsider.com/the-future-of-micro-drones-is-getting-pretty-scary-according-to-alan-lovejoy-2012-6 Just in case: jaclaz

Please read (attentively) my previous post. jaclaz

Yes, that is an accepted form, "Che la luce sia". (but only God can say something like that) The linguistic issue is about the use of the auxiliary verb to have (avere in italian). In English, you can say (even without being a deity or God ) something like: "I want to have this shirt washed" Which to me implies "I don't care in the least who exactly will wash/clean this, nor how exactly this cleaning is performed, I am charging you with this task, do whatever you see fit as long as the result is reached". The same form in Italian is possible, but it simply sounds "silly" or somehow unneededly "pompous" (and it sounds more like a "wish"): "Vorrei che questa camicia venisse lavata." The "direct order": "Have this shirt washed." is possible in English, but not in Italian, which can only be made in the direct form "Lava questa camicia" (which translates back to "Wash this shirt") that implies that you are charging directly the other person to actually do the thing (instead of seeing that it is done) . JFYI, and definitely OT: jaclaz

@Phaenius The "Make it so" is still a "normal" imperative, it's the form "have something done" that I sometimes miss (of course there are ways to convey the same, but they don't sound as effective and cannot be made in a short sentence). In Italian "Make it so" is translated effectively with "Lo faccia" or sometimes with "Proceda" (which are similar, respectively, to "Just do it" and "Proceed"). There is an anecdote in the life of a famous actor (I seem to remember it was Peter O'Toole) about when he did some tests to become officer in the army. Since he didn't want to actually be enrolled as an officer to a written test question that sounded something like: To which, he purposefully replied jokingly with: To his great surprise it was the right answer and he passed the test. jaclaz

You evidently greatly underestimate the price for giving away your moral integrity. jaclaz

Let's try with another analogy from another field. Why a large number of policemen/federal agents (which are issued a Beretta or a Glock 9 mm or a .357 or a .45 by their Administration) would live their lives carrying also a small .38" 2" revolver (or any other kind of smallish gun) on their right or left ankle? Let me think.... You normally have several ways: clone the system IF that goes bad re-install from the original install CD (if available) using EITHER the COA sticker (which surely you DON'T have) or with the key found by the keyfinder (and if with the latter most likely need NOT to reactivate online or by phone) IF that goes bad or the CD/iso is not available then re-deploy through the recovery CD (which is a "particular" kind of "clone") and need NOT to reactivate IF that goes bad re-install from *any* install CD (if available) using EITHER the COA sticker (which surely you DON'T have) or with the key found by the keyfinder (and most likely need to reactivate online or by phone) You are limiting yourself to one or two of them while you have (still) the possibility of having (IF needed) at least an additional "way out". jaclaz

Out of this article (nice preview of the "real thing") found through one of the above links : http://www.pcworld.com/article/2024690/microsoft-surface-pro-hands-on-impressions-from-ces.html I would like to highlight part of this sentence: We are talking of a "closed doors" preview offered at CES 2013 to a technical writer of one of the most influential PC magazines in the US, preview being patronized DIRECTLY by Microsoft, and the guys/gals there cannot answer to a "plain enough" technical question? There is no reference to that question being asked as a "test" with no possibility for the MS representatives there to "phone home" and get the answer, apparently besides not knowing straight away the answer to a "normal" question (VERY normal when you are offering a preview on a pen-based tablet) they seemingly did not have the capabilities (or the will) to get it from some of the engineers (that SHOULD know it). I would like to underline the fact that in this case it is not "third party" hardware .... Redmond, we have a problem. jaclaz

Yes and No. Meaning that a clone or "dd-like" or "forensic sound" image of an existing, activated install, once properly re-deployed to the "original" PC/system will need NO activation, nor a key, NO MATTER which kind of system is installed (bios-locked, OEM, Retail, Volume, upgrade, whatever). A clone ( or "dd-like" or "forensic sound" image) is "a clone" . not " a copy" and not "a backup", it is something that is so similar (actually identical) to the original that you will have NO WAY (nor Windows, nor anyone or anything else) to tell which is which. jaclaz

Good. Then we have a few days for "general chatting" in the meantime. Just for the record, this sentence is partially inaccurate: If you really had a lot of money, you would call someone who works for you and tell him/her: (BTW this kind of passive form of imperative is a nice feature of English, is not available in Italian in a comparable form) jaclaz

Hey guys, come on , take it easy.... I know that it is "very basic", but maybe the issue here is terminology. Let me have a try at it with a different comparison. @xmf Let's say that you go to your hardware store and buy a new set of locks for your house. By paying an extra and ordering them "custom" you can have the kind normally used in hotels or more generally commercial premises where each lock has two (or more) "level" keys. Very simplified you get 2 locks that BOTH open with your "master" key, and at the same time 2 set of keys, each one ONLY opening the corresponding lock. As an example you can keep the "master" in your keyring and open with it BOTH your front and back door, but give your kids only the key for the back door. OEM CD's (big OEM's with what submix8c calls ROYALTY key) work not entirely unlike such a kind of locks. When the system is first installed by the OEM, it is installed using it's "master" key. Then a sticker is applied to the actual piece of hardware with a speciifc "other" key (valid as well). The difference being that the "master" key (through methods that won't be discussed) will produce a pre-activated install, while the one on the sticker will require you to activate the XP, either online or in some cases through telephone. Is the above more clear now? jaclaz

WHICH approach? (THREE of them were listed) Yes, you already stated this, and still you fail to describe the kind of "security level" needed/required and the amount of money you (or your company) value this, as said there are Commercial solutions that use a running service to prevent access to USB thingies not "approved". I cannot see why. Having them in a domain may be an easier way to deploy/re-deploy or update a given solution, but right now you are missing this solution outright, and as said it seems like GPS (and consequently GPO as well) by itself is not "enough". jaclaz

Yep, that was with the intent of disambiguating, as often happens the MS guys are using the same term to completely different concepts. Additionally I presume you are not blocking "USB Removable" you are blocking ALL Mass Storage devices belonging to the "Removable class" (i.e.also Firewire). http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc772540(v=ws.10).aspx And by "exactly" I meant something like: http://gps.cloudapp.net/Default.aspx?PolicyID=2282#2281 IF the thing is done for some "serious" security reason, you might want/need to also look in the WPD classes. I don' t think that you can get a "by serial" limitation through GPO or Registry, see this: http://www.itexpertmag.com/security/danger-usb (AND relevant links in it) The "common" solution is a service running in the background, AFAIK, BUT you can use another approach, preventing installation of drivers: http://community.spiceworks.com/how_to/show/1488-lockdown-usb-to-specific-removable-usb-drives Basically you install all "authorized" devices, then you "lock" the install of any further device. (I have NO idea how much secure this approach is). Personally, I would TRY getting the Mass Production Tool for the "authorized" sticks and combine the solutions based on several ways: by Vid/PId <- this is the one that you reported as working but without the needed details by DeviceID <- with DeviceiD changed by the MPT, this is the approach with "Device ID" seen here: http://www.itexpertmag.com///images/stories/3308a/Step%20By%20Step%202/Shot%202.jpg by serial <- IF one of the above allows for specification of the serial by serial once installed the authorized ones <- this is the approach seen here: http://community.spiceworks.com/how_to/show/1488-lockdown-usb-to-specific-removable-usb-drives With the appropriate MPT you can customize Vid, PId, Device ID and serial, so that you create a "unique" set of "authorized" sticks. This way the "intruder" would probably need to bypass a couple of "layers" instead of just one. jaclaz

The USB specs do impose a serial on any USB mass storage device (controller) and actually I would say 99.99% sticks I have ever seen do sport - from factory - such a serial number. The Vid and Pid on the contrary, besides same "brand" has often and still are misused, some brand will have their own Vid, some will use the generic Vid of the maker of the controller. A number of "brands" will additionally use te same Pid for very different models. HOW exactly you have (currently) blocled *all* "removable" USB storage devices? What exactly do you mean by "Removable" devices (most if not all USB stick controllers are set in factory as Removable but the bit can be "flipped" and you can have for a very large number of models/brands/controllers a USB stick set as "Fixed" - just like a USB hard disk normally is). jaclaz

Someone needing a hug? jaclaz

Just in case: page__st__7 jaclaz

In other words (actually the SAME ones ) . http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh825212.aspx i.e. it seems like nothing has changed to the procedure if not that you have to press the spacebar first. jaclaz

There are two "main" issues with your approach: "moving" a NT or 2K to new hardware is - while doable - NOT easy (and the "source" needs to be "prepared"), installing them from scratch would most probably be less complex and conversely faster (and you still may have issues with the drivers in the sense that you have to find the appropriate drivers for that "newish laptop" for NT and 2K) what you are experiencing is a "normal" 0x0000007b STOP ERROR caused by the lack of an appropriate SATA/AHCI driver, but apart from it do NOT assume that other "base" drivers such as chipset and video drivers will be "easy-peasy" (still in the case of "adapting an existing install to new hardware) To get further help it is essential that you post the specification of the given "newish laptop". For NT, if the hardware is compatible with UNIVBE and UNIATA, then you may have a chance, otherwise finding a set of appropriate drivers for a "newish" latop are very, very low. For 2K, if the hardware is compatible with UNIVBE and UNIATA, then you may have a chance, otherwise finding a set of appropriate drivers for a "newish" latop are - though a bit higher than with NT, still very low. jaclaz

The Log you posted seems OK (obvious, but I mean that there seems to me like there is no particular action carried by WinsetupFromUSB in the sense of "out of ordinary"). This is the "only" (BTW normal) change made to the stick: 2013/01/15 13:48:45- Checking if grub4dos is installed properly 2013/01/15 13:48:45- grub4dos BS/MBR and files are NOT installed properly 2013/01/15 13:48:45- Installing grub4dos BS/MBR and files it is *possible* that the corresponding actions in USB_MultiBoot_10 were not carried or not carried successfully (as an example - NOT necessarily applying specifically to your case) because of different paths in the 64 bit version or due to some of the "queer" behaviour of windows 7 with UAC, disk protection and what not. If Wimb happens to pass by, he may have a more appropriate idea of what may have happened or be able to suggest you a specific troubleshooting procedure, it's quite a bit of time since I used USB_MultiBoot_10, but I remember discussing about the use of a tee command to have steps logged as well, check the documentation, your (failed) attempt with USB_MultiBoot_10 should have also produced a log. USB_MultiBoot_10 and WinsetupFromUSB are NOT the "same" tool in a command line and GUI version, they are distinct project, both born from common grounds but that took separate "evolution paths" over the time. Though the basics are the same and info is migrated back and forth between the two apps the are different in the sense that they may use different strategies/implementations to reach the same goal. Beside these two "main" approaches/apps, there are more, just check the stickies , as I see it, unless you want to take the RED pill : since we have now several approaches you could otherwise just stick with the one that succeeds. jaclaz

OT (off topic) but OT (on topic), about this: http://allthingsd.com/20130115/tell-me-again-how-surface-is-the-tablet-consumers-really-want/ When on my "real life" job I do estimate *something* (building/construction projects), I rarely miss the target by anything larger than 20% on preliminary estimates, it never happened in my life to make a wrong estimation by more than 10% and normally the difference between final estimation and final costs is within +/- 5%. I do understand how estimating sales (or if you prefer forecast them) allows for larger margins of error, but going from an estimated two millions to a "now estimated" one million that another "magician" estimates as 700,000 and that another one "now estimates" as 500,000-600,000 but that "just last month estimated" as 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 is crazy. You cannot call them "estimations", "result of throwing a couple of dice and multiplying result by 100,000" seems like a much more accurate description of the procedure they used (and are using). Please remember that set apart the specific nonsense about the Surface RT these are "decision makers" from very influential firms , these are the guys that decide the rating of a country or of a bank/financial institutions, they are those that indirectly influence the value of the money you have in your pocket or the value of your home, or the value of the stocks you may possess . The word of the day is obviously: jaclaz

Hmmm, I have quite a few friends that would accept a beer (or more than one ) but none that would stand listening to clipped, capped music, though @Phaenius Yes, there was a (spammer's) post that was deleted by some of the Admins/Mods. (the good news being that you may have auditory hallucination , but not yet visual ones ) jaclaz

Good. Let's see it from another point of view, "responsiveness" This thread has being going for over one month and you still have to try the first thing that was suggested to you. Actually TWO things were suggested: and you did only one of the two, which doesn't make it a 50% achievement as unless BOTH are tried the result of just one of the two is meaningless. That suggestion is more than one month old (and has not yet been put into practice), some nit-picking and resisting later, another suggestion was given: (together with the SAME item #2 of the original suggestion) This other suggestion after more than 20 days is now "scheduled" in a (hopefully near) future as "I will clean the card.". To re-cap, three PRELIMINARY, BASIC, NEEDED, RECOMMENDED steps: try another OS on that PC <- hopefully done clean the sound card (and the innards of the PC, etc.) <- you will do this before or later test the sound card on another system <- you will do this before or later (hopefully in the course of 2013) Mind you this thread is also (at least in some parts) a "fun" one, and it is a good occasion to exchange ideas and to "chat" a bit, but a troubleshooting procedure tends to be - generally speaking - very different, like: suggestions made put into practice (immediately or however in the shortest possible time) suggestions made being NOT each time and BEFORE being put into practice being nit-picked over and over results from suggestions (put into practice) being reported new suggestions (hopefully) made based on the results of the ones put into practice (loop to 1 until problem hopefully solved) Now, a very large time allowance to put into practice the above three PRELIMINARY, BASIC, NEEDED, RECOMMENDED steps is (at the very most) half a day, that is something I would personally do (ALL three of them) one evening after dinner and before going to bed, and if needed, complete the next morning early. I would venture to affirm that the fact that after more than one month you have not yet done these three PRELIMINARY, BASIC, NEEDED, RECOMMENDED steps makes you appear as not particularly "responsive" or however not acting in a "timely" manner. jaclaz

No Forum Rule broken nor anything really missed, rest assured. You found a good "base" resource for your issue, but as often happens your report is a bit "vague". The referenced thread lists a number of different possible solutions, but you cannot put them all in a "I tried everything statement" (BTW one of the suggestion there was to try the GUI WinsetupfromUSB which you obviously did not try) and you seem like having, besides the "everything" in that thread triead also "every" other partitioning/formatting utility. JFYI you are using two of the worst (not "generally" but "specifically") possible environments, WIndows 7 AND the 64 bit version of it. My suggestions are (in this order): FORGET (temporarily) about USB_multiboot_10.cmd and try INSTEAD WinsetupfromUSBwithGUI (please remember how you have a GOAL and that the path through which you can reach it is fundamentally irrelevant) If the above works, good if it does not, post the log of it (it may help to troubleshoot anyway your issue as it will contain a number of info about the environment in which you run it) and try again with USB_multiboot_10.cmd CHOOSE one of the two USB sticks you have available (the smaller 2 Gb makes "more sense" for this project, though there is no real reason why the 16 Gb should not work) DETAIL which EXACT (among the several suggestions on the related thread you have actually implemented (see list below) The related thread lists about the possible causes/solutions (among possibly others that I missed at first glance): UAC on/off FixPath.exe change in .cmd VER | find "6.1." > nul jaclaz

@johnhc PLoP has NO support for Firewire. @negatiiv Yes, you can make a USB "kicker". (IF you are talking of a PE 1.x - i.e. XP/2003 based) Unfortunately there is not much experience with Firewire around so your mileage may vary. Start by getting the basics of the idea here: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=21242 the procedure is called either "XP Kansas City Shuffle" or "fake signature method" (googling for these will give you more related results). The main issue is/will be the start setting for the firewire related drivers/services. Doing the same for a later PE 2.x ( Vista based) or a PE 3.x (Windows 7 based) it may as well be possible, but I presume only for a "flat" build, I don't remember any previous posts/threads about these, in any case if a machine has only USB 1.1 support in BIOS or has actually only USB 1.1 chips it is so old that a later than PE 1.x would run so slow that it wouldn't be practical (slow processor and most probably a limited amount of RAM). Easiest would probably be to do a test with UBCD4win . http://www.ubcd4win.com/ The UBCD4win forum is down but the app by PC_user is available: http://web.archive.org/web/20121027133727/http://ubcd4win.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=11375 From here: http://web.archive.org/web/20120610192807/http://www.ezpcfix.net/ubcd4win/UBUSB.exe jaclaz

Not that by assuming (and assuming, and assuming and NOT trying anything suggested) you are getting very far.... .... it could be some crazy electrons that decide to get on the surface instead of being channeled into the cables BTW, for all we know submix8c has perfectly working sound and needs not to "get anywhere"..... Also, you underrate the kind of satisfaction that you will feel if you just §@ç#ing clean/inspect all the components as told you n times by everyone here and the problem doesn't get solved. Just imagine the satisfaction of proving everyone wrong jaclaz