jaclaz

See what is the issue (on the clone). Make a copy of the basic sectors the MBR and the PBR. The MBR is "easy", it is the first sector of the disk, CHS 0/0/1 or LBA 0. A suitable tool to make a copy of it is HDhacker: http://dimio.altervista.org/eng/ you want the first sector of the \\PhysicalDriven or you can use the mentioned rawcopy: rawcopy 512 \\.\PhysicalDrive1 C:\drive1.bin To get the right n try having a look at the disk in "disk management". If you have only a disk in your PC, it will be PhysicalDrive0 and the "clone" you attach to it will be PhysicalDrive1. While you are at it, can you see the Partitions(s)/Volume(s) in it? (LogicalDrive(s)). If yes, you need a copy also of the first sector of it (them), but since you are running 7, that sector may be locked. If this is the case, you might want to try this other software CLONEDISK: http://reboot.pro/8480/ http://labalec.fr/erwan/?page_id=42 or a tool to dismount the drive(s)/Partition(s)/Volume(s): http://reboot.pro/12413/ and then use direct disk access (rawcopy, etc.) to copy the PBR(s). Once you have the MBR and the PBR(s) copies compress them in a .zip file and attach them to your next post. If you have difficulties in getting the PBR's attach just the MBR and I will give you more detailed instructions on how to get the PBR(s). AFTER having got these copies, you can start TESTDIDK following this guide: http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk_Step_By_Step You WANT a log file. If the disk was parittioned under VIsta or 7 you want to answer "Y" to the questions if irt should look for Partitions created under Vista. If you are lucky, the procedure might fix the issue. Report. jaclaz

666 (seriously, *any* number will do, the "number dialing" is only to make the modem connect). You know, like http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/dcisp.htm You have to find a way (look in the Windows docs or, more likely in the actual modem documentation, how to set the "blind dial", if by any chance the modem is waiting for a dial tone, it will wait "forever"). The sense of the suggestion with Hyperterminal was "beyond" your test with the mobile phone (making sure that each of the PC has a functional Hyperterminal and Modem, which is however a good idea ), the point was if you could manage to connect the two PC's through Hyperterminal. (this would verify that there are no hardware or "hardware settings" issues or a "wrong" initialization string on either modem, the "AT&F0" sets the modem to "default" (factory), but different modems may have different "defaults") And you should read again the pages you found, there won't be *any* call as you have not an actual telephone line and not even a "plain" simulator for it, let alone a simulator with ring generation (which is a rather comples electronic "box" or that you can buy for a few hundreds bucks ). So, it is pointless to set the "server" as "waiting for incoming calls": http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/trickwin.htm Tricking Windows into Answering the Line jaclaz

It seems like "standard" somehow "initiating" or "forcing" bootux.dll during booting: http://www.boyans.net/BootMenuPolicy.html Also, in a "dual boot" 7/8 environment it seems like it has a "bad" side effect: http://www.sevenforums.com/installation-setup/249301-bootmenupolicy-standard-win-7-hides-multi-boot-menu.html I would dare to call it "new non-standard" as opposed to "standard".... Or, on the other hand, it is interesting how Windows 7 is ALREADY considered "legacy" . jaclaz

Yep, this is the issue. In order to boot the XP the files NTLDR, BOOT.INI and NTDETECT.COM are NEEDED. Theoretically they should go to the Primary Active partition (i.e. (hd1,1) in your case) or at least in a Primary partiton (booting from a Logical Volume, though possible with a few tweaks is not "standard" nor "normal"). Check also the other partitions for the above files (it is possible that they went inside the recovery partition or to one of the two logical volumes). Since you have seen (during the Blue text part of the setup that you ran) that files were copied, they must exist *somewhere*. You should also check for directories named: $WIN_NT$.~BT $WIN_NT$.~LS at least the first one should exist and for files: SETUPLDR.BIN TXTSETUP.SIF jaclaz P.S.: Are you sure about partition numbers here?: There should be no Partiion Num 3, but a Partition Num 5 (maybe a typo?)

As I see it this part is senseless not because it is in anyway "wrong" , but because it is essentially an "act of faith" (without having any real world signs that what would be a good move actually is one): Let's see in detail: this is a wish, and a good one IMHO, in the sense that when and if someoine will provide us with something that is actually better than the desktop, I am pretty sure everyone will embrace the new technology. But untill the thing that should replace it is a monkey training toy, or Metro NCI, this is unlikely to happen. The logic fallacy is evident, the syllogism "new=better" has been proved right many times, but as many times it has been proved wrong. The further implied "if you don't embrace this new technology then you are senselessly conservative" is of course m00t, the actual senceful sentence being "if you don't embrace this new technology, that is evidently and proven to be far superior to the preceding one, then you are senselessly conservative" may have of course it's merits, but the actual evidence of the pretended superiority is far from being clear and surely not proved. Next sentence is even worse, another good wish: It is more along the lines of "I have a dream....", there are AFAIK not any particualr improvements regarding malware or viruses (and even if there are they will be worked around in no time) nor in anything that by sheer magic will make complexities vanish or make the thingy in any way "more reliable". Now if the proposal was to throw away what essentially is a NT system with a design going back to the early 90's with an entirely new archtecture/codebase, let's say a Real TIme OS like (example) QNX: http://www.qnx.com/ and/or tools like (other example) ERLANG: http://www.erlang.org/ that would be something we could actually talk about, but applying a (crappy) interface to (actually forcing it onto) a substantially "traditional" OS and call it "new" (I mean from the point of security/complexity/reliability) it's evidently a false statement or, in the best case an idealistic wish. This is instead (while still being a "wish") pure "bull§h**": Noone (here or elsewhere) is afraid of changes, but of course if the change is "for the better". Our own lives were revolutionized by the Facsimile, by the PC, by Internet, by the Mobile Phones, and we glided across these large technology shifts without a hitch (just like our grandfathers or grand-grandfathers glided across the changes connected to inventions like the Telegraph, then Radio, Cars, Telephone, Airplanes, Television and what not), adapting and learning new ways. It won't be difficult at all for us to learn how to use a "designed for 5 years old" interface, we learned from thin air how to deal with BASIC, and then with DOS and UNIX, do you really think that this change will be a problem for us? There is nothing "revolutionary": http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/revolutionary in Windows 8, nor in it's new crappy interface, no "technology change" at all. It reminds me of motorbikes (mopeds), a modern 50 cc engine can have without an issue 8 HP's or more (please read - for politically correctness - 5.968 kW or more ) and a bike made with it can easily have a max speed of 60 or 70 km/h, but in order to be registered as "moped" (in Italy) and thus allowed to be driven by 14 year old kids, they must: have at max 4 kW have a max speed of 45 km/h what the industry does is simply to "dumb down" (usually by "capping" the intake) a bike (by itself capable of much better performances) in order to comply with the Laws and fulfill the requests of this market. Now, it makes a lot of sense for a moped you give to a kid, the fact that the "original" bike was designed for higher speeds means indirectly that it will have better brakes and handling and thus it will be safer at lower speeds when compared to a "strictly designed as moped" competitor, and it is senceful that the kids will have some time learning to drive at a "forced" lower speed. But usually, you don't look at mopeds as the source for innovation.... and I have seen very few people getting one of these : and have it "capped" because it goes too d@mn fast.... (or have an automatic gearbox fitted to it because it thus becomes easier to drive) jaclaz

The 0x21 is a "special" partition made by RMPREPUSB on the USB stick to increase the compatibility with pesky BIOS when (you used the option C: 2 Partitions or something lke that in RMPREPUSB, right?). THis is "normal" if you used RMPREPUSB. So, (hd0) is still the USB stick (which is allright, since you have rebooted and you did not run any .lst entry). But what do you mean by "and hd(1) is FDD" ? A device is either a Hard Disk or a floppy. If the USB stick is (hd0) and it has two partitions (hd0,0) and (hd0,1), the latter being the "special" one cylinder partition made by RMPREPUSB, the (hd1) must be (or at least SHOULD be) the internal hard disk. You should be able to access 5 (five) partitions on (hd1): (hd1,0) <- the "recovery" partition (hd1,1) <- the Windows 7 100 Mb "boot" partition (hd1,2) <- the Windows 7 "system" partition (hd1,4) <- the fist Logical volume (hd1,5) <- the second logical volume See: http://diddy.boot-land.net/grub4dos/files/syntax.htm There exists NO "root" on device (hd0) as it is a "WHOLE" hard disk, nor there is one on (hd1) which is again a "WHOLE" hard disk. A partition/volume/filesystem has an accessible "root", the "root" of the whole hard disk contains no files (as it has not even a filesystem). When you issue the command: root (hd1,1) grub4dos will provide some feedback, like: http://diddy.boot-land.net/grub4dos/files/basics.htm Filesystem type is NTFS, partition type 0x07 Again I am more interested on the output/feedback of the commands than to the description of them, if you could simply post the exact commands you issued and the exact feedback that you had, it would be more straightforward, right now I have to guess , based on your description: what command you issued what feedback you had what you assumed from that feedback or from something else that you didn't cite As an example, this: is what I call "vague" and can be read in at least three or four different ways..... WHICH exact commands? WHAT was the exact feedback? <. this is what they actually show HOW you derived from the feedback of the commands your colcusions? <- this is what you represented as "shown" by the "commands". NEVER use an acronym unless it is "universally accepted", FDD means "Floppy Disk Drive" but could also mean "Fixed Disk Drive", sometimes spending a couple more words can help If the USB device is (hd0) and the (hd1) is NOT the internal hard disk , then there is an "earliier" issue (at BIOS level detection of connected disks). jaclaz

Have a look at this, also: http://microapache.kerys.co.uk/ and to the various "altenatives": http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?sc=125 jaclaz

@ Fredledingue Here (scoop! ) is a screenshot of the new MS advanced training program (Lesson #2: identifying objects by their shape and colour and recognize simple English words) and the effects of the first Windows 8 Virus jaclaz

Actually it is a very interesting approach. The given link is about haveing the Dreamcast as "client" and the Windows Machine (with both the dial-up modem AND the "broadband", let's say DSL connection, as "server"). Now, if I get it right you want the Satellite to become a "Dreamcast" (client ) and the P4 become the "server". So, *somehow* you must "translate" this set of instructions: http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/dcisp.htm to the Satellite running Windows 98 And apply these sets of instructions: http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/trickwin.htm http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/inconect.htm http://www.maturion.de/dreamcast/mterlouw/connect.htm to the P4 machine. BUT, there is the possibilty that one of the two modems (or both) have an issue with the (missing) phone line, so it is possible that you will need the "Modem Line Voltage Simulator". See also this: http://www.jagshouse.com/modem.html and this: http://www.computing.net/answers/windows-31/pc-to-pc-via-modem-article-here/10182.html Have you made some tests with Hyperterminal (or similar)? jaclaz

OK, let's start See how CASUALLY there is a dedicated Forum for this specific topic: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/157-install-windows-from-usb/ jaclaz

Yes, now that we have a correct idea about your hard disk status, we have to understand what happens. Try describing what happens (and which choices you took). When you are booted from the USB and get to the grub4dos chioices, you can press c to get to grub4dos command prompt. From this you can run a few commands to understand what is happening (and/or boot to the Windows 7 if it doesn't). First step, since you already run (partially) the tool would be to understand WHAT files were copied WHERE. At the grub> prompt try issuing the commands: geometry (hd0) [ENTER] geometry (hd1) [ENTER] this will tell us if the drive order is USB=(hd0)=first disk or Internal hard disk=(hd0)=first disk i.e. if the drive order has been kept "normal" or has it already been re-mapped by an already run grub4dos command. Let's say that the drive order has not been changed, if it is replace in the following the 1 (hd1,x) with 0: root (hd1,1) [ENTER] ls [ENTER] can you see, besides BOOTMGR also NTLDR, BOOT.INI and NTDETECT.COM? If yes, issue: cat /boot.ini [ENTER] what are the contents of BOOT.INI? If not (that was the 100 Mb "boot" partition), try doing the same above but on (hd1,2) (the "main" primary partition). Report. jaclaz

Vey good this is the part that is interesting: =========================================================================================================== Partition Information for Disk 1: 152,625.3 Megabytes Volume PartType Status Size MB PartSect # StartSect TotalSects =========================================================================================================== Type 27 Pri 15,360.0 0 0 2,048 31,457,280 NTFS Pri,Boot 100.0 0 1 31,459,328 204,800 NTFS Pri 102,398.7 0 2 31,664,128 209,712,497 ExtendedX Pri 34,765.7 0 3 241,376,633 71,200,072 EPBR Log 12,307.6 None -- 241,376,633 25,205,977 NTFS Log 12,307.6 241,376,633 0 241,376,696 25,205,914 EPBR Log 22,458.1 241,376,633 1 266,582,610 45,994,095 NTFS Log 22,458.0 266,582,610 0 266,582,673 45,994,032 Here it is commented: =========================================================================================================== Partition Information for Disk 1: 152,625.3 Megabytes Volume PartType Status Size MB PartSect # StartSect TotalSects =========================================================================================================== Type 27 Pri 15,360.0 0 0 2,048 31,457,280 <- the recovery partition NTFS Pri,Boot 100.0 0 1 31,459,328 204,800 <- the "fresh install" 100 Mb Windows 7 "boot" partition this one contains BOOTMGR and boot\BCD NTFS Pri 102,398.7 0 2 31,664,128 209,712,497 <- the "main" Windows 7 "system" partition (remember this is "right" and opposite to MS terms) ExtendedX Pri 34,765.7 0 3 241,376,633 71,200,072 <-the whole Extended partition EPBR Log 12,307.6 None -- 241,376,633 25,205,977 NTFS Log 12,307.6 241,376,633 0 241,376,696 25,205,914 <-the first logical volume inside it EPBR Log 22,458.1 241,376,633 1 266,582,610 45,994,095 NTFS Log 22,458.0 266,582,610 0 266,582,673 45,994,032 <-the second logical volume inside it jaclaz

@SteveOC If (after dinner) you will be able to read this, it means that the whole idea of splitting the topic became self-evident . jaclaz

Well, then you should go and ask your questions to some kids ... BTW I wouldn't take your posts as an example of correct spelling, let alone grammar: jaclaz

A non-obvious idea Patented innovating technology And an App exploiting it http://www.nosedial.com/whatis.html The need for phone sanitizers might increase.... jaclaz

Yep. Almost but not quite. See if this helps you (it should): http://www.multibooters.co.uk/multiboot.html (please read "Windows 7" instead of "Vista ") More generally the MBR is the first absolute sector of a hard disk (or hard disk like) device. It contains: boot CODE partition DATA (the partition table) some more DATA (disk signature) The "object" of the EASEUS tool is (mainly) the partition table inside the MBR (for what relates to Primary Partition(s) and to the Extended Partition) and to one or more EPBR's (one for each logical volume) chained from the Extended Partition entry in the MBR. Strangely enough the BCDEDIT tool is a tool to EDIT the BCD store. This is a (BTW stoopid, as it has been coded with the same structure of a registry hive) sort of configuration file or .ini, as a matter of fact it does exactly the same functions the "old" BOOT.INI did on NT/2K/XP/2003. In a nutshell standard booting sequence is: NT/2K/XP/2003: BIOS->MBR->PBR of Active (primary) partition->NTLDR->BOOT.INI (user choices)->NTDETECT.COM->Windows Vista :ph34r./7 and later: BIOS->MBR->PBR of Active (primary) partition->BOOTMGR->\boot\BCD (user choices)->Windows The instructions you see are a (rather complex) set of grub4dos commands, making use of an additional external grub4dos script (shifthd.bat), it would be very complex to explain them, as it would need first making you aware of the grub4dos syntax and way of working (interesting but maybe OT or too confusing for you right now). In case you want to take a "crash course" on the matter, you would need to go through the grub4dos guide: http://diddy.boot-land.net/grub4dos/Grub4dos.htm and, after having got the "basics" there, find your way to the more advanced topics (mostly undocumented or badly so) related to the newish grub4dos features of batch scripting... Simplified the working is the following, the set of grub4dos commands attempt to "autodetect" the exact way your BIOS "sees" the mass storage devices connected to your system and tries to re-map them the way they "should be" when you have NOT booted from the external USB, in order to make the install work. Your pre-existant install of WIndows 7 is most probably made originally using a feature of the Windows 7 OS that makes two separate partitions, the "Boot" and the "System" one (that MS names "the other way round") compare with: http://www.multibooters.co.uk/system.html http://www.multibooters.co.uk/articles/windows_seven.html#install7 It is possible that this (combined with the still UNdetailed) situation of your other partitions) "confuses" the grub4dos detection and *somehow* the devices (and/or the partitions in them) are not presented "in the right order/way" to the BIOS (for further booting) or to the actual XP installer routine. So, we need to: understand how exactly your disk is partitioned what exactly the grub4dos sees when it "fails" (and why exactly it "fails") find a way by either changing the partition scheme or changing the grub4dos commands or issuing manually a few of them on the grub4dos command line to have the thingy work Since I presume that this will be not an "easy-peasy" one, if you are OK with it (please acknowledge this post of mine) I would split your posts and related replies to a new thread, so that we limit the length of this "main one" and the outcome (hopefully successful) will not risk to be lost among the many pages of this thread. I would title it: jaclaz

Good , then post it/them (the "previous" MBR and the "current" one) as I find better to have a look at actual data when compared to "description of data". I wonder WHAT (the heck) BCDEDIT has to do with the MBR (let alone wth recovering a MBR), but probably this will become evident later . jaclaz

I will give you some good and some bad news. There is NO such thing as a "9x version of the Offline Registry Library" (AFAIK, but I tend to be usually quite well informed on this specific topic ). The Rawreg is (unfortunately) a half @§§ed left in an UNfinished state, and it is perfectly UNuseful. Still AFAIK the actual file format for the Registry has not big changes between 9x and NT , and since you are going to use offline access to the file(s) the actual filenames (and the way they are combined in an actual ONliine registry) is pretty much irrelevant. Compare with: http://paullee.ru/regstry.html Via google translate: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpaullee.ru%2Fregstry.html jaclaz

As I see it, there is nothing apparently "illegal" in your requests, more simply: they make no sense whatsoever you are completely failing to provide meaningful info, not only by your own will, but also when specifically asked for them You should take a deep breath, spend some time reading ATTENTIVELY these : http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/problem-report-standard-litany.html http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/put-down-the-chocolate-covered-banana.html then try re-posting your questions with some background, explaining the goals and with some more details, and possibly without assumptions. This way it will be more likely: that you get a reply that the reply is a useful/correct one. Of course you are perfectly free to expect that the tooth Windows fairy visits your thread(s): or e-mails you, but believe me, it is UNprobable. jaclaz

NO. Meaning that it is NOT possible. Either you are describing incorrectly the way the disk was partitioned before or the way you are describing it as it is now (or BOTH ). You cannot have a "first partition" and a "fourth" partition both as Logical volumes inside Extended. An Extended partition is a contiguous space on a disk that may contain one or more Logical Volumes, and BTW changing (BTW HOW exactly?) a recovery partition from Primary to Logical Volume inside Extended is likely to make it not working anymore. Do you have a copy of the MBR of the disk BEFORE you made changes? If yes, please post it together with a copy of the current MBR (you will need to put it/them inside a .zip) or upload an archive containing it/them *somewhere* and post a link to it. Alternatively, get PTEDIT32 or PartInNT from: ftp://ftp.symantec.com/public/english_us_canada/tools/pq/utilities/ and post a few screenshots (a plus would be if you would include those of the EPBR's in the Extended partition). Even a screenshot of Disk Management would probably do. It is possible that your partitioning scheme *somehow* confuses the booting mechanism (grub4dos based) of WinSetupfrom USB..... jaclaz

And as well *any* number of other applications. Winhex is IMHO an excellent Commercial application , though buying a license for it, is not however "justified" or "needed" if you only want to know what file corresponds to a $MFT entry. Ferrari's are beautiful ... . jaclaz

But not in the DOS one, according to: This is the part that I am trying to make as clear as possible (zone #2). jaclaz

Yes, I have understood that . BUT what I have understood is that the zone #2 (between 8Gb and 137 GB) is NOT "completely safe" without a DDO. (this was the scope of my post, making sure that I got that right) and though still not yet completley clear to me, rloew's last post (again as I read it) confirms this. (2^20) * (2^8 - 1)=267,386,880 that is NOT the 28 bit LBA it may be the limit in your specific BIOS (it is a bug in the BIOS, not the LBA 28 limit, that's why I talked of buggy bioses, if you prefer BIOSes not fully compliant to ATA specifications before ATA-6). http://www.seagate.com/support/kb/disc/tp/137gb.pdf jaclaz

Yes, but there is NO connection between the entry in Disk drives and whether the device is formatted (or partitioned and formatted). In Device Manager: The whole device will have a single entry as "USB mass storage". <- this is usbstor.sys (the "single" entry I was referring to) NO matter if formatted or not, the disk device will have an entry under "disk drives". <- this is disk.sys and partmgr.sys (tI see it as a "direct consequence" of the above) If the device is NOT formatted, it will still (if functional) get a drive letter (in order to let you format it ). As always everything is possible but the "Code 43" should not be connected to the "disk device" part (or more generally with disk.sys or partmgr.sys) on a functional USB stick (it may happen with a USB adapter + hard disk, but on a Stick they are "all together"), in these cases widows would stop the "Usb Mass storage" device as a whole . It's a pity you don't remember where exactly the third entry (if I get it right the one with actually Code 43) came out in the Device Manager tree, but unless it was a single "glitch in the matrix", there will probably be a "next time" when you will be able to record this piece of info, as it still doesn't sound "right", I mean a device is either working or Windows has stopped it".... ...or could it be a case of "phantom device"? http://windowssecrets.com/newsletter/how-to-prevent-and-remove-phantom-devices/ jaclaz

@submix8, maybe you are making it more difficult than needed . CHS limits are EASY to calculate. If the BIOS sees the device as having a 255/63 geometry, latest CHS accessible sector is: 1024*255*63=16,450,560 sectors * 512 = 8,422,686,720 bytes if the BIOS sees the device as having 240/63 geometry, then: 1024*240*63=15,482,880 sectors * 512 = 7,927,234,560 LBA limits have nothing to do with CHS, nor with geometry seen by the BIOS (obviously). Again it is simply mathematics. A 28 bit number can be at it's max 268,435,455 (28 ones one after the other), you can verify this also with calc.exe: and, since LBA is measured as "offset" (i.e. starting from 0), this gives exactly 268,435,455+1=268,435,456 "indexable" sectors * 512 = 137,438,953,472 bytes. Unless there is a bug in the BIOS, these are the exact limits jaclaz