jaclaz

I will try again, SECOND WARNING: About: As you have been already told, here and on the thread on the other board you linked to, making such thing in software is either NOT possible or extremely difficult, and in any case it has not being done till now, and even when it will be made it cannot be "universal". It is not that by whining or by repeating over and over your questions/wishes you will in any way facilitate the creation of such a tool. We got the message, you want someone else (not you since you don't know programming) to write something that is (for those that actually know about programming) deemed impossible. Your wish is recorded, you don't need to insist on it, or if you wish to do so this thread (which is about JFX's WinNTSetup) is NOT the place to post about it or your other babblings. jaclaz

AQM The general idea is that you NEVER post twice one after another, if you have something to say you forgot and your previous post is the last one in the thread, please edit it adding new content. I cannot make head or tail of what you are talking about. With their limits, the software solutions are all "on the table", grub4dos, winsetupfromusb, rmprepusb, rufus, etc. Everytime I hear someone - expecially if self-proclaiming himself as a non-programmer - talking of "universal" OS installer I get shivers down my back. Such a thing does not (and CANNOT) exist. There may be solutions, like the mentioned ones that can usually be extended/adapted to another OS install (sometimes, not "always" or not always without modifying - possibly heavily - the install source). If you want an "universal" solution, you need a hardware one, at least THREE of them do exist, mentioned in this thread: http://reboot.pro/8944/ the iodd drive CDEMU (experimental) isostick (which has a dedicated sub-forum) http://reboot.pro/forum/132/ With the addition of this thingy here (which seemingly is not - or not yet AFAIK- multiboot): https://sites.google.com/a/lingoes.co.cc/cardrom_en/isoeasy jaclaz

Cannot say if already posted, if yes, sorry, otherwise interesting (poll on adoption of Windows 8 asked to Techrepublic members): http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/window-on-windows/rejected-74-of-organizations-have-no-plans-to-deploy-windows-8/6828 An interesting point is the difference in percentage by nation/country. (possibly driven by the HP help desk needs ) The actual report is for member only, though: http://www.techrepublic.com/whitepapers/windows-8-business-intentions-deployment-plans-driving-factors-roadblocks-and-strategies/32565796 As an OT note: How many "external" input devices does the MS Surface use? How many of them have seemingly a big driver issue? http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Releases-Workaround-for-Surface-Sound-Issue-305508.shtml Seemingly we can use UNARY to reply to both questions.... jaclaz

Well, at least you are sitting in the car....and it isn't raining... SCOOP! I have a RARE image of Trip outside the restaurant (and with no car) attempting to protect the privacy of his customers : And before someone invents a new accessory for IT Admins without cars, it has been already invented http://www.prlog.org/11975147-zippaz-announces-debut-of-zippa-shade-universal-computer-umbrellafits-laptops-pads-tablets.html http://zippashades.com/index.php/zippa-categories/category/listing/27-computer-umbrella.html jaclaz

Your google-fu is seemingly low , the real issue is that the good guys put one of the nice robots.txt on their site (which is no more): http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.globsol.com/ (it should be this one ) Maybe you can get something of use by googling for: site:http://cd.textfiles.com/ nslookup but cannot say.... jaclaz

Mind you the good thing about freedom is actually that of being free to do things that may seem silly and unneeded, as a matter of fact : But life is also a comedy, you have to choose roles . If you want to play ol' time expert like in it's allright, but then you cannot seriously ignore how a pagefile should be on the faster (after RAM) storage subsystem you have available and that any "solid state" media has a "finite " amount of "write cycles" before it won't be working anymore. Or you can play n00b (which is also OK), but then you should keep a "lower profile", follow this tutorial (or a similar one of this kind): http://www.ehow.com/how_5887452_move-file-sd-card.html http://web.archive.org/web/20100430151734/http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,1679935,00.asp ignore any suggestions/info given on more "reliable" sources, like: http://forum.ultrabooknews.com/showthread.php?35638-WinXP-page-file-moved-to-SD-card http://serverfault.com/questions/46903/use-an-sd-card-for-your-page-file-windows-7 http://www.pocketables.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3416 http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/371619-virtual-page-memory-sd-card.html http://forums.xsreviews.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=5792 or, better, the already given: http://reboot.pro/9461/ and be happy thinking that you can make a pagefile on a USB SD card without using a dedicated filter driver. (BTW putting a pagefile on a SD card may happen on particular hardware, but it is very, very UNlikely and simply not possible if the connection to the card reader is USB) JFYI, here is an illustrative article summing up the three filter drivers that are commonly used: http://agnipulse.com/2012/03/filter-drivers-removable-media-fixed-disk-windows/ jaclaz

Yep, that is one of the possible issues. You can try three alternate strategies: try imaging the same sectors "backwards" try imaging a larger chunk of sectors (and then extract from the larger chunk the relevant sectors) try imaging a larger chunk of sectors "backwards" (and then extract from the larger chunk the relevant sectors) It is UNlikely that the issue is due to the UNbricking, unless maybe if you cleared the G-List or whatever is cleared with i4,1,22 command, and that extent is/was on remapped sectors (still in the idea that it belongs to the part of the disk that you imaged in the 134 Gb), it is much more likely that your disk "bricked" because of some issue, and this issue is the reason. It is difficult to say if once diagnosed properly with suitable tools those sectors can be made accessible again JFYI, the 2048 offset is the "normal" offset for first Primary partition on a disk partitioned on either Vista or 7 with "default settings". Data recovery, in general, and expecially at a DIY with simple tools level, is more than anything else a sometimes you win, sometimes you lose kind of game . A professional recovery of that drive (if possible) can be anything in a range from US$ 500 up to a few thousands, it's up to you to determine the monetary value of those files you are missing. I am not familiar (specifically) with .pds files, maybe even if you miss the initial 16 sectors of it, it can be rebuilt/recovered or however important info retrieved from the rest of the file (or the program making those makes a temporary file from which you can gather the missing sectors).... jaclaz

You might not, we do: jaclaz

Or maybe those that have not such a fast connection INSTEAD of whining find workarounds.... You know, like: http://reboot.pro/13049/ jaclaz

For NO apparent reason: jaclaz

To have an idea of the other kind of issues when "playing" with non native resolutions: http://www.avsforum.com/t/720897/viewsonic-n3252w-1360x768-resolution-issues http://pixelmapping.wikispaces.com/Guide+to+1366x768 The "basic issue" is divisibility by 8, see: http://forums.entechtaiwan.com/index.php?topic=20.0 but how exactly the combo graphic card+ 98 drivers + monitor will behave exactly I cannot say, Powerstrip may be the only way to have them working "properly" . jaclaz

I would assume that missing as much as three bytes difference/anomaly in 512 is allowed and can happen to even the most accurate peep : http://reboot.pro/2246/#entry14607 jaclaz

Cannot say... The 1360x768 is NOT supported by the monitor, see the Samsung User Manual, standard signal table: it may work nonetheless, since it is "very near", but you are risking to have a brand bew monitor and need a new video card or use it at a less-than-optimal resolution. jaclaz

That monitor "native" resolution is 1366 x 768@60Hz, check your video card (and it's drivers) to see if it is available. Since it is an *almost* 16:9 display, the only other "common in the old times" resolution that might provide an acceptable quality is the WXGA 1280x720 ("pure" 16:9). jaclaz

I need to spend a few words in defense of the good MS guys If anyone reads this thread he/she may get the idea that suddenly the good MS guys became complete morons. This is not the case, to tell the truth they have always been like that and over the years have introduced, in each and every OS, some senseless feature or stupid quirk (as well as omitting needed information, over-inform on trifling aspects noone cares about, misinform on many topics, fail to fix evident and often admitted issues). The difference is that over the years we got used to the quirks, senseless choices and what not because each one - senseless as it might be - was an evolution of a previous senseless feature or of a known stupid quirk, what changed this time is that they introduced a whole bunch of completely new senseless features and many new stupid quirks and we are fed up with having to adapt to their (distorted) view of computing and find new workarounds additional to the hundreds or thousands we were forced to invent, discover or get used to over the years. So, most probably it's not like they changed, it is us: we are evolving.... jaclaz

JFYI, the spirit of Rule #2a http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules is to give a meaningful title to your topic and do not change it every time you ask a new completely unrelated queston on the same topic (which you should NOT ask here , but rather start a new topic about this new unrelated question/issue ). You see , till yesterday someone looking for a solution to a problem with internet connection with 98SE might have found this thread and tried changing cable connections, now that you have changed it's title the usefulness of this thread (regarding the internet connection issue) for anyone else but you has become none. jaclaz

Monitors don't really *need* drivers. The video card outputs a (VGA) signal, at a given resolution and refresh rate, a (CRT) monitors can ether "hook" that signal or it cannot, under OS that can recognize the monitor, resolution (and expecially refresh rates) that the monitor cannot support are disabled in the video card settings. On LCD the matter is slightly different, a LCD monitor has a "native" resolution, for a 19 inch "typically" it is 1280x1024 (WxH) or 1280x800 depending if the monitor is 5:4 or 16:10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_size http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution On LCD, ANY resolution which is not it's "native" one will be interpolated/stretched and what not, in any case it will work with far then optimal visual results, so what you really should take care of is that your video card (and it's drivers) supports the specific "native" video resolution that your LCD monitor has. jaclaz

Sure , no prob , only give me some time to overhaul my wheelbarrow, it needs some work to be ready for race: I must have somewhere an old KTM 360 engine .... that should fit nicely .... jaclaz

Something like this: http://techreport.com/review/16255/acard-ans-9010-serial-ata-ram-disk but made slower by attaching it to the USB (2.0) bus? Possibly with the USB 3.0 they will make something.... jaclaz

Open the physicaldrive in DMDE (since you have it handy), you know like: There is this point that you seem to have not grasped completely : LBA of a sector (on an opened Physicaldrive or image of it) is ABSOLUTE vol sec (on the same sector) is RELATIVE to volume. Hence (in the given example that you provided) 6158983-6158920=63 this is the offset to the beginning of the volume. BUT if you mount the physicaldrive image with IMDISK, because of the specific way IMDISK works, the offset to the volume becomes 0 and thus Absolute LBA and Relative LBA are the same. I hope now this matter is more clear. About further attempts to recover from the failed drive, there are two "levels" of issues: first is to make sure that you are getting the "right" sectors, which you can verify by doing tests with some files that you also already have in the 134 or 500 Gb image second is to hope (you cannot do much more than that) that those sectors are readable and adre not corrupted. Right now it is not yet clear if you are still in the first level or if you are (unfortunately) in the second and the sectors for that particular file are either corrupted or unreadable. jaclaz

I dont want to be grumpier then usual, but I simply represented you the current situation to the best of my knowledge. The ONLY way to have a pagefile on a non-internal disk in a Windows NT based systems is AFAIK the Diskmod filter driver I pointed you to, which is NOT hardware specific and has been tested and verified to be working on: XP 32 bit Vista BOTH 32 and 64 bit 7 BOTH 32 and 64 bit there is NO reason why it should not work on XP 64 in theory, but, as said YMMV. You asked a question, I took some time to answer it, as said to the best of my knowledge, the fact that you don't like the answer or you are uncapable of putting it into practice or simply want to wait someone else to try it, should not prevent you from: ask nicely clarifications if there are things that you don't understand being thankful for the time spent in attempting to help you The fact that you used to program in 8 different machine languages evidently prevented you from learning "foreign languages" and also some common forms of politeness. A lot of people don't know what a filter driver is on a NT based system, but instead of accusing other people of writing in a foreign language, most probably because they never programmed in 8 different machine languages, they tend to try understanding what is written, instead of skimming through and jumping t (bTW completely absurd) conclusions and come back whining. I hope you will have fun while putting a pagefile on an external device (or completely failing at it ).. jaclaz

Wait a minute, now that I think of it , what (the HECK ) is your G:\ drive? (if it is not the first primary volume on a hard disk partitioned with the "traditional" CHS aligned scheme it's offset will NOT be 63 ) The idea is that what myfragmenter gets is the Logical Cluster number, that is ALWAYS relative to the begin of the volume. The myfragi batch translates it to ABSOLUTE LBA (starting from the start of the DISK) by multiplying the cluster number by cluster size and ADDing to it the offset (63 in the case of that disk/volume). If you access the original disk, you need the absolute LBA, if you access an image mounted with IMDISK (that ignores the 63 sectors before) you should subtract from the result of myfragi 63 sectors (or better change the data in the batch, see below) if you are using any disk where the volume does not start at 63 you need to change the offset in the batch (or manually add/subtract the difference), these are variables in myfragi.cmd: A "normal" NTFS formatted volume will have clusters sized 8 sectors (but not necessarily) while the initial offset (where the Volume starts on the disk) is 63 ONLY if it is first primary partition and the disk is formatted "normally", i.e. before Vista , if that disk has been partitioned bu another OS or through a third party utility, the Volume may start at *any* LBA offset. Are you sure you are using the "right" PhysicalDrive? I will reiterate how datarescuedd numbers them starting from 1, whilst Disk Manager and any other utility using the \\.\\Physicaldriven object to access a disk numbers them from 0. jaclaz

JFX, the BOOTSECT.DAT posted by AQM (and as well the bootsector in WinNTSetup.log) are both "wrong". Sectors before are 0 (should have been 63), i.e. at 0x1C there should be 0x3F and not 0x00. jaclaz

Well the good news: http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-admits-surface-keyboard-splitting-problem-7000007189/ are that they are aknowledging the: the road to actually admit the "mental separation" from user base and reality is still long though... jaclaz

Yes, the behaviour of dmde is "normal", the Physicaldrive (and obviously the my500gb image) start at absolute sector LBA 0, th actual Volume (drive letter) starts at absolute LBA 63, which becomes Relative LBA 0, hence the LBA: 6158983, vol.sec:6158920 63 sectors difference, when you open the Volume, it's initial offset is 0 (as you are not accessing the physicaldrive, but rather a virtual disk through IMDISK, that simply "fakes" that the Volume is a Superfloppy with no sectors before). In theory in datarescuedd you should select NOT the Volume (drive letter) but rather the disk (something like "drive 2"), but it should NOT make any difference. Is it not that the resulting image file is locked by the still open datarescuedd? I'll check if I can give you an alternate tool to try instead of datarescuedd..... jaclaz EDIT: Try with pldd, here: http://home.comcast.net/~plavarre/plscsi/tools/pldd/ The syntax you should use is, given: myfragi.cmd g:\test.jpg 1 52254759 418038135 3104 g:\test.jpg the following (make sure you get the right \\PhysicalDrive number n):