jaclaz

... and you didn't fint this one yet : jaclaz

Win+R simply opens the "Run" dialog/popup. In it you have to type some commands. You can use some tool (like Nircmd): http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/nircmd.html to set focus to the already active CMD window and paste/execute in it some command. This still seems completely unlike being a GOAL (or if it is a goal, it appears like a senseless one ). BTW, you seem like having a tradition of being reluctant in providing the actual scope of what you are asking for, posting instead "vague" or "generic" examples, which everytime need some back and forth rounds of questions to actually get what the actual question is about. (and hopefully provide an appropriate solution/answer/advice) jaclaz

I am failing to see the difference between what you initially asked and the result of what was suggested, can you try expanding on what you want to achieve? Additionally, I presume that your actual GOAL is NOT that of having one or more CMD.EXE windows echoing to screen "Hello World" , please do state the actual GOAL, there might be different ways to achieve that. Be aware of the risk of slipping on a chocolate covered banana : http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html jaclaz

More loosely you have too many variables in the equation, at least: WinSetupFromUSBwith GUI beta (8) and Install from USB a senselessly BIG hard disk, additionally SATA an inane amount of RAM unverified behaviour of the BIOS (IDE emulation mode settings) uncertainties on the drivers used My proposal (as a test) is: FORGET about the whole "install from USB stuff" make a single, FAT 16 or FAT32, 1 Gb in size Primary, Active partition Remove as many RAM sticks as you can set the BIOS to "IDE emulation mode" (or similar) use the good, ol' WINNT.EXE way: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=16713 jaclaz

In your case you should wait another 12.42 minutes, then re-do from start. Seriously, there are three possibilities: the actual command went through BUT (for *any* reason) there was not feedback of it's execution the actual command went thorough BUT (for *any* reason) it was not actually executed the actual command didn't go through (again for *any* reason) and thus wasn't executed The same "remedy" applies to ALL three, after having waited a "reasonable" amount of time (that in this case means no more than 2 hours, i.e. double what was reported as longest time - which BTW I somehow believe to be a non-that-much-reliable report as the thingy should last at the most a few minutes, ten at the most), stop everything, check if the drive was unbricked, if not, start again from scratch. To put it more bluntly , the ONLY choice you have is to do the above. There is no particular "order of operations" for the "shut down", to be on the safe side it is anyway "advised" to: close terminal switch PC off switch "other" PSU off then redo in the opposite order (as you already did correctly ): switch "other" PSU on switch PC on open hyperterminal jaclaz

I would gladly, but it's not that easy. As a general rule, when posting some file, always compress it to a .zip or 7z archive. Your next step should be to select (in the upper part) the NTFS0 volume and click on the "Open Volume" button. What happens? If everything is OK, you should be able to see SOME of the data that was in the volume. Ideally you should be able to locate some small text only file (like a .ini or .cmd) and verify visually it's contents, then attempt recovering it (to ANOTHER drive). If the attempt is successful, you can either (manually, aka 1 by 1) attempt recovering each file (it seems like there are something like more than 11000 still indexed files, though) or decide (still if these attempts give some good result) to buy a license for the DMDE thingy, even the "Home Personal" edition should do. jaclaz

Changing grub4dos to Syslinux (or viceversa) doesn't change the filesystem. A number of minimal Linux Distro's (like the ones that come with Antivirus) do not have support for NTFS (in the sense that they cannot reside on NTFS formatted filesystems). You may need a FAT32 formattted stick. You should NOT use WAREZ, or however don't talk about them here. jaclaz

Yes (or No). http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/questions-with-yes-or-no-answers.html jaclaz

@pnieset You still fail to report how EXACTLY (with which tools, with which commands, etc., i.e. EXACTLY) you attempted to add those files to a DVD. The error message you posted seems about a non-bootable DVD, but is confused and misses any meaningful detail: Try to read it with an objective mind , how do you suppose that anyone can guess what you have done (and further than that guess which is the issue at hand)? kohlerbkqn seemingly posted about the "official" Toshiba method to create the install/recovery media on DVD, about which you may read about here: https://www.csd.toshiba.com/cgi-bin/tais/support/jsp/bulletinDetail.jsp?soid=2753749&pf=true Why don't you give it a try? If it works it is completely automated. jaclaz

Hmmm. It sounds like there are no traces that TESTDISK can find, which is unusual. Get DMDE: http://softdm.com/ And try opening the disk with it (Drive->Select Drive->choose the PhysicalDrive->NTFS search). And report (post a screenshot) If one (or more) NTFS volume(s) are found, you can access them by selecting and "Open Volume". Another thing, you should try to get (and post in an archive) the first 100 sectors as detailed in so that I can have a look at them. jaclaz

"Keys A: add partition, L: load backup, Enter: to continue" You are between: http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk_Step_By_Step#Quick_Search_for_partitions and: http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk_Step_By_Step#Save_the_partition_table_or_search_for_more_partitions.3F i.e. since "Quick Search" failed, you want to do a "Deep Search". jaclaz

Only to further clear the whole point is/was not whether the referenced post is a good "guide" or a "bad" guide, simply that it represents NOT a "guide" and at least from me there was not at all a bashng of it, but simply a pointing out how it cannot (IMHO) be called a "guide". jaclaz

Bene intelligo tuae rationes. Hoc nuntium ab innominato instrumento missum erat. jaclaz

Just for the record: http://www.zdnet.com/microsofts-ballmer-not-ready-to-reveal-windows-8-surface-sales-7000006602/ The linked to interview to the Wall Street Journal contains IMHO a pearl): (I bolded the pearl) During an interview with one of unarguably one of the most influential financial newspapers in the West world, the very Top Eecutive of one of the largest software companies worldwide, as an answer to a serious question, provides (senseless) anecdotal evidence AND the interviewer accepts this nonsense? I mean : sounds too similar to : to be plausible .... in 2012 ... and presuming that the very Top Executive of MS does not fly to San Francisco to have dinner with a bunch of morons (or maybe it was a form of flattery raised to the power of n). jaclaz

I am more used to work on command line, it is simply faster, open a command prompt, navigate to the directory where TESTDISK is, type on command line testdisk_win.exe /log press [ENTER] If you double click on testdisk_win.exe you will anyway be prompted to do that: http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk_Step_By_Step#Log_creation you want to Create a log. jaclaz

...and on half the internet... http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=1696999 http://www.wjunction.com/53-technical-help-desk-support/156791-auto-create-txt-file-each-folder.html http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13122504/go-to-path-read-txt-file-with-vbscript jaclaz

The initial detection (if any is found ) of the PBR/bootsector should take a few seconds. If no bootsector is found where it normally is (sector 63 on XP - if I recall correctly it was just a single "huge" partiton) it may take much longer as it will have to scan the whole disk, on a perfectly functional SATA II 500 Gb disk I would say less than one hour, though, for the whole scan. jaclaz

No prob, no time constraints of any kind , nice bunnies. Sure , start a new thread here: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/5-hardware-hangout/ jaclaz

Let's see. I simply cannot read something so fragmented with: every two or three lines. So here it is in a single chunk, with a blank line between posts and in red comments NOT by the Author *whatever* you can call that, it seems to me NOT a "guide" or "tutorial", but a Forum thread misused as a personal Blog. At least now it is readable . A version with the unrelated parts stripped out follows: How this can be useful to a complete newbie is of course - like beauty - in the eye of the beholder. Personally - presuming I am a bit further than the newbie stage and notwithstanding the fact that I am already largely familiar with all the tools and procedures mentioned (and a quite few more not mentioned ) - it looks to me like nothing more than a quick "checklist". jaclaz

From second page of the linked to article: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411445,00.asp I fully subscribe, it couldn't have been put better in words. jaclaz

Well, in your particular case you simply "cannot" (in the sense of "easily") get the PBR. The MBR you just posted is partially corrupted, hence the disk manager cannot find any LogicalDrive (the PBR is first sector of the LogicalDrive) on the disk/image and HDhacker simply doesnt know which sector to get. For whatever reasons, the Partition Tables in the MBR you posted are completely 00ed out. At first sight the MBR CODE is seemingly that of 2K/XP. You can try running Testdisk (remember to use the /log) since the original disk seems like having being partitioned under XP, reply N (No) to the question if the disk was partitioned under Vista. Report BEFORE telling Testdisk to write anythng. jaclaz

Evidently I cannot have a conversation with you , there must be something lost in translation that we seem not to be able to overcome. The message is/was simple: You are using mostly unneededly a set of unstandard, partly wrong, overly complex procedures, commands and settings that can IMHO be greatly simplified. Some of these "unstandard" settings will most probably result in a number of applications having issues with the system. Just for the record, you never talked of Windows 3.0, but only of Windows 3.1 or 3.11 until your last post. As said, if you are happy with them, I am very happy too . jaclaz

You need a "tee" command/app. See: http://www.robvanderwoude.com/unixports.php http://www.robvanderwoude.com/files/tee_nt.txt http://www.commandline.co.uk/mtee/ jaclaz

Sure , the whole point being that a 129/16/63 or 120/16/63 is "right" (in the sense of standard) and a 936/4/35 is UNstandard. I still don't get from your reply if the laptop has one or two "real" hard disks and if two on which hard disk is the /msdos.img. Let's say that on a single hard disk with a single partition a "normal" DOS 6.22 in a "standard" roughly 64 Mb image CHS 130/16/63 works allright here with this menu.lst (that it seems to me simpler than the one you posted): title Microsoft MS-DOS 6.22 64 Mb map (hd0) (hd1) map --mem (hd0,0)/msdos.img (hd0) map --hook root (hd0,0) chainloader +1 (the need for A20 settings may depend from your BIOS, though it sounds "stange" to me that you actually need both the settings you have posted ) jaclaz

Oww, come on ... just having some fun, but actually jaclaz