jaclaz

Check the release topic on reboot.pro: http://reboot.pro/17501/ Another user has the same or similar problem and Joakim is working on it, there is already a new versionposted, but not yet feedback from the OP. jaclaz

Yes/No. Meaning that once fixed the filesystem, any bad sector will remain "bad", i.e. data saved on those bad sectors is normally NOT recoverable. "I ran TESTDISK", no offence intended , is like saying "I used a tool". Try running it with a LOG file AND post the LOG and describe EXACTLY (with the more possible details) HOW you have run it and WHAT it gave as feedback. The usual general advice, EXPECIALLY if you suspect bad sectors is to image the drive BEFORE attempting any repair, a tool like datarescuedd: http://www.datarescue.com/photorescue/v3/drdd.htm may be able to manage to read data from some "hard to read" bad sectors (of course not from a "really bad" sector) and you would have a "way back should you for any reason make a mistake during the recovery procedure. Besides, it is very possible - it greatly depends on WHY/HOW the corruption occurred - that after the MBR/partition table has been fixed/restored, the actual filesystem needs to be fixed (CHKDSK /R) and this is a "no-way-back" kind of operation, if it works, good, but if for any reason it fails it may make the situation acyually worse. How big is the failed partition? Do you have another disk drive of suitable size? jaclaz

Which OS? Which Filesystem? It works here on XP/NTFS ( having set ProgramFiles(x86)=C: ) what is the output of SET ProgramFiles ? @ECHO OFF SET ProgramFiles(x86)=C: SET Program ECHO. DIR /S /B "%ProgramFiles(x86)%\Test\(CF3 Support)\" ECHO. FOR /D %%p IN ("%ProgramFiles(x86)%\Test\(CF3 Support)\*.*") DO rmdir "%%p" /s /q DIR /S /B "%ProgramFiles(x86)%\Test\(CF3 Support)\" jaclaz

Of course you can interject. For the record, I never talked about "missing" SATA drivers, I talked about verifying to have slipstreamed the correct ones (which is not exactly the same thing) and the suggestion was (intentionally) tagged as "generic". There are so many things that can happen during a USB originated setup, that unless you are VERY familiar with the specific tool/method used AND you have ALL possible details most suggestions are necessarily wild (though educated) guesses. As a (still "generic") example of what kind of crazy things can happen, review the "historical thread", like here: It could be a "source" problem, like: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/300556/en-us jaclaz

NO. First thing is to IMAGE or CLONE that disk on another disk or however backup the DATA (unless you have a proper backup of all the valuable DATA on it) I don't want to scare you, but you have to understand the risks involved. By running CHKDSK /R you have very good chances to fix the issue , BUT since you don't know: how many bad sectors you have what caused them (some hardware faults may cause the number of bad sectors to "spread") Every single boot, access, every single second the disk is powered on may reduce chances of recovering data from it. ONLY IF and WHEN you have your DATA safely backed up, proceed with CHKDSK /R (and with checking the disk with the Manufacturer utility) jaclaz

NO, it isn't. Heck!! I am trying to reduce the chance of misunderstandings. Re-partitioning a disk changes (at the most) 4*16=48 bytes in the MBR and, if Extended Partition volumes are used a bunch of other sectors. <- in practice EVERYTHING CAN be recovered if only primaries are created and ALMOST EVERYHING if also logical volumes were created Re-formatting a pre-existing partition (with the same filesystem it was there before) under MS OS up to XP (or in later OS with the /Q switch or "quick" mode) overwrites the filesystems structure <- EVERYTHING that was not fragmeneted CAN be recovered - possibly losing the original filename Re-formatting a pre-existing partition (with a different filesystem) under MS OS up to XP (or in later OS with the /Q switch or "quick" mode) overwrites OTHER parts of the filesystem structure <- in most cases almost EVERYTHING can be recovered, often including fragmented files and their names Formatting a new partition made at different addresses than the pre-existing one under MS OS up to XP (or in later OS with the /Q switch or "quick" mode) overwrites other areas <- results will differ on a case per case basis, but in many cases a large number of files can be recovered If a disk has been wiped, NOTHING can be recovered. If a partition or volume (newly made or pre-existing) has been formatted on Vista or later OS without the /q switch, the area occupied by the partition of volume will be wiped and NOTHING can be recovered from it Fully Unattended is (of course IMHO) overall a "foolish" approach (because of Murphy's Law) in each and every case, EXCEPTION made for "bare metal" deployment. Please note how OP never explicitly stated WHICH windows OS was used, though in his profile there is "Windows 7 x64". jaclaz

I don't want to seem grumpier than I normally am, but if you use Wintoflash: http://wintoflash.com/home/en/ you should probably ask for help on their support forum: http://wintoflash.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=3 If you use any of the methods in the stickies on this forum: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ you ask for support here. It is only logical , here it is likely that you find people more expert with the tools used here, and there you will fnd more people familiar with the tool used there. A "generic" thing to check: Since it is a netbook that came with windows 7, it is likely to have a SATA/AHCI disk, are you sure you have integrated to your source the correct drivers? jaclaz

See: jaclaz

Perfect, we missed this also http://grammarist.com/spelling/disc-disk/ Just for the record a hard disk, is never "formatted", it is "partitioned". Partitions or Volumes or drives in it may be "formatted". jaclaz

Good, then - by pure chance - I managed to dig up two that you haven't tried yet In case the "technical" word is "supplicant": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplicant_(computer) See also if anything here: http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t5543-getting-wpa-to-work-using-netgear-wg511t-adapter-on-windows-98se-system.html http://www.network-builders.com/howto-enable-wpa-psk-windows-smc2802w-v-2-pci-card-t41837.html is of use. This is the "secureW2": http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.securew2.com/uk/download/SecureW2_312.zip jaclaz

I would be surprised if such a mousepad capable of being incompatible with BOTH a Logitech and a Microsoft mouse (please read as "two of the most common make/brands) has ever been produced and sold in more than 2 (two) units.... OP would have been really UNlucky to find one of such specimens..... But yes , testing on a plain A4 shet of paper would be also a good idea. jaclaz

And AGAIN, the behaviour of the "full" format is DIFFERENT from up to XP and from Vista onwards AND that disk WAS NOT a newly bought one, if it was, there would have been NO DATA to loose . @bhlpt See: Up to XP: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/302686/en-us From Vista onwards: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/941961/en-us As often happens the good MS guys use wrongly "disk" instead of "drive" but if the disk was re-partiioned the final effect is the same. jaclaz

Maybe if you list EXACTLY the ones that you tried and had failure with, you (actually we) will save time with diiplicates.... Yes/No. http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/questions-with-yes-or-no-answers.html Have you tried this one?: http://web.archive.org/web/20050719081534/http://www.wirelesssecuritycorp.com/wsc/public/WPAAssistant.do http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.wirelesssecuritycorp.com/wsc/member/* Or the later McAfee version: http://web.archive.org/web/20080306051916/http://www.wirelesssecuritycorp.com/wsc/public/Downloads.do (IF WPA-PSK is OK) And this one? http://hostap.epitest.fi/wpa_supplicant/ jaclaz

Yes , but you won't like them . While being wrong, you are right, but you are still wrong. If the disk has been wiped, it has been wiped . On Vista and later a full format (i.e. without the /q switch) is enough to wipe. Once a disk has been wiped with a "single pass" of 00's (or any other values for that matters) the data is GONE, FOREVER (and no amount of money nor recovery company will get it back). The only hope you have (cannot say if it applies to your situation) is if the wipe/format affected only part of the disk (and not the full disk) in which case maybe some partial data can be retrieved (only if physically residing on the part of the disk that wasn't wiped). I have seen a few reports about Vista and later OS re-ordering (for whatever reasons) the disks, it is likely that this is what happened to you, you should put a check (actually more than one) identifying correctly the disks and/or partitions on it BEFORE wiping/formatting. BTW there is NOT one (valid) reason in the world (if not deleting your data safely before giving away a device) to format "full" on Vista or later, let alone use a wipe program. You can well wipe the unallocated space AFTER the new install (if you really want to have unused sectors being all nice, rounded 00's and to have possible some advantages with a few imaging/cloning programs that can "skip" 00's). jaclaz

Since there is WAY too little confusion on this , I will throw something on the table : http://reboot.pro/11212/ http://reboot.pro/11312/ Would the erwan.l thingy work on SETUPREG.HIV? (it should if you are running XP or later cannot say from within a 2k) jaclaz

The "standard" (mine) is however: /i /s /e /r /v /k /f /c /h Most probably the issue you had was due to the missing /h switch, that will leave behing any "hidden" file , and the /o may also cause issues (if the target is NTFS). jaclaz

Yes, most probably that's the perverted effect. @Charlotte the Harlot You might want to appreciate how the good MS designers have made things easier for the street artists: they can bring with them just 4 (5 including the one for the border) colours, so they can run faster! And Apple is anyway ahead : Only for historical reasons (and OT ): jaclaz

Good. Now, what could have been the reason the good MS guys did that change? The chances of this phenomenon actually "changing something" is in practice virtually 0, as it is actually very rare to have a floppy filled "up to the brim", but I find it "queer". Could it be some form of "preparation" for NTFS formatting? (that was however removed since day 1, because of the size of the metadata, and was it not for the good Mark Russinovich - and for the good memory of you know who it would have been deemed as impossible). Compare with: http://code.google.com/p/mft2csv/wiki/Tiny_NTFS It would be interesting if a simialr experiment would be repeated on a NT 4.0 and on a Win2K machine ... jaclaz

No USB ? And there is still the grub4dos.... jaclaz

Most probably it is (as development platform) but the effect I can see at user level is (of course IMHO) a regression in quality of apps. Of course everyone has his/her opinion, there are people thinking that Visual Basic is better than C#: http://www.simple-talk.com/dotnet/.net-framework/10-reasons-why-visual-basic-is-better-than-c/ Now, you may think that his is off-topic , but as a matter of fact, you would be wrong : in the above page there is something that can be well applied to the fanboys approach to the new stupid NCI : jaclaz

Well, if Sinofsky contributed and contributes to the killing of .Net and Silverlight he is not as evil and senseless as he seems. jaclaz

Adobe released a new FREE font that is "console compliant": http://reboot.pro/17557/ http://blogs.adobe.com/typblography/2012/09/source-code-pro.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/sourcecodepro.adobe/ jaclaz

At least jaclaz was waay faster than you (TWICE) jaclaz

News? jaclaz

Sure you can , but then what is the point then to ask for help/advice? Doing another thing from what is suggested? The same thing that you posted how you don't know how to do? The idea - just for the record - is that BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE you make a clone or dd-like copy of the failed stick (better if two). This way you can try several different programs/approaches and have always a "way back". Besides in some cases the actual media may be damaged in such a way that sequential reading (like a dd-like copy does) can get the data while "random access" (which most recovery app use) cannot. You have been suggested EXACTLY what you are advised to do: Now, if you don't understand the above three suggestions, you are very welcome to ask about them and I will gladly try to explain/expand of them but what do you expect that I reply, after havng suggested you to do something if you ask me if you can do something completely different? Here it is: NO, DO NOT use those programs on those USB sticks! Mind you it is perfectly possible that any of them will be able to recover your data , but the point is are they the "best" or the "suggested" procedure? NO, they are NOT (if they were I would have probably suggested them instead ) jaclaz