jaclaz

You joking right? We even managed to make self-burning files.... History: http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=18845 http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=21123 http://reboot.pro/4023/ Current thingy (by damian666): http://reboot.pro/4398/ http://damian666.boot-land.net/downloads.html jaclaz

I am not at all "angry", I am simply (and "by design" ) VERY grumpy as this approach usually allows for messages to better go through when normal, plain approaches, like writing tutorials and howto's that are not read do fail. jaclaz

If you want to slipstream to a source, you can (and should) slipstream directly SP3 to your "vanilla" SP0 source. If you want to update a running Windows XP system to SP3 you need SP1 as an SP0 install "won't take it". (but you are right , there is a lot of mis-information about this particular thing of SP1 needed ) The time I fell for it : http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=24257 (cdob is of course correct ) To integrate the SP3 you can use direct slipstreaming (no need to use nlite), follow this: http://www.howtohaven.com/system/slipstream-xp-service-pack-3.shtml jaclaz

It seems to me like you missed some (most) of the actual Read-me-first (the part that says DO NOT use a CA-42 cable unless you know what you are doing ). Anyway, it is possible that you simply "bent" a little the contacts (by using a too thick piece of paper) . The general idea is to always check if the interface can communicate with the HD AFTER a successful loopback test but BEFORE loosing the screws/inserting the cardboard. It is possible that you fried the PCB , but not very likely (you should have seen smoke coming out of it, or visible burns on a chip or your power supply would have shut down because of a shorted TVS diode). A good idea would be to completely remove the PCB, thoroughly verify visually contacts AND clean them, then try mounting back the PCB tightening the screws firmly (compare with Isaac Asimov's take on this): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_(short_story) http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/Asimov.html#Expt See here for reference: jaclaz

And, just for the record , though using the "classic theme" on XP helps: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/294309/en-us a few more tips/tricks: http://etutorials.org/Server+Administration/windows+xp+hacks/Chapter+2.+The+User+Interface/Hack+20+Windows+XP+to+Windows+2000+Retro+is+Cool/ http://wiki.nullstack.net/Use_Classic_Themed_2000-Style_Login_Screen http://www.wincustomize.com/explore/all/search/windows+2000 and a "full" theme: http://vertigosity.deviantart.com/art/Inexperience-Patcher-0-7-2-27939557 ..and you can go even a couple steps further... : http://www.uic.unn.ru/~krnv100/winclassic/lastnote.txt'>http://www.uic.unn.ru/~krnv100/winclassic/lastnote.txt http://www.uic.unn.ru/~krnv100/winclassic/winclassic.txt'>http://www.uic.unn.ru/~krnv100/winclassic/winclassic.txt http://www.uic.unn.ru/~krnv100/winclassic/ jaclaz

JFYI, a correctly tweaked/optimized XP (if you can stand it's toyish looks ) can be almost as fast as a Win2K (and it does have among the zillion completely unneeded "enhancements" a few ones worth it ). By using (with some common sense) the advice given on sites like blackviper's or bold-fortune: http://www.blackviper.com/ http://replay.web.archive.org/20080401072517/http://www.bold-fortune.com/forums/index.php?act=home or by using the info available here on the MSFN forum, particularly in the nlite section, you can remove/disable most of the annoying, senseless and slowing down services that normally run on a "default" XP. jaclaz

But actually removing the [unattended] section from WINNT.SIF causes not that many problems, you only have to additionally press F8 to accept the EULA, see here: jaclaz

Well, NO. Corollary: Unless it is a MS Operating System that has a long history of issuing in MOST occasions a meaningless error message comletely UNrelated to the actual issue at hand. In other wordss ALWAYS DOUBT, and check twice (and thrice) before trusting an MS OS , or ANY other OS or ANY advice you get on a technical board . Happy problem is (for the moment) solved . jaclaz

Most of the pictures you posted are meaningless (like the ones depicting your PC/CASE or the actual box your HD came in). The Explorer views are also mostly meaningless. (you should set explorer to show extension and hidden and system files and have a view with "Details" and NOT "Icons") The only one of interest is the one about "properties" of the disk. Now, presuming that your drive is still "I:\" do the following: Open a Command Prompt In it type DIR /S I:\>C:\Dir_of_I.txt the above will create in the root of your C:\ drive a file Dir_of_I.txt which represent the actual output of the DIR command compress this file into a .zip archive and attach the archive to your next post The error about I:/$MFT is typical of a filesystem problem (that can be caused by hardware, but that is more likely to have been generated by software). Ideally you should have ANOTHER (at least) 1.5 Tb drive available in order to be able to image the contents before trying to fix (if possible) the filesystem or however to attempt recovering the files. In other words, we have three possible approaches: filesystem recovery mixed filesystem/file based recovery file recovery First one can be EITHER very simple or extremely complex and anyway the attempt may "worsen" the probabilities of succeeding wiht the other two ones. The mixed mode requires, just like the above in the case of complexity, a deep knowledge of filesystem and tools and - with all due respect - notwithstanding your declaration about Software skills - you don't seem like having the very basic knowledge to even attempt following a set of instuctions/advices . Third one is BTW the one that has the most probabilities of success, BUT, depending on the quantity of the data you need back and expecially on the type of files you want to recover, it may be a troublesome (in the sense of long/tiring) path, as you will likely loose ALL the actual filenames (and you will need to re-name files manually). It's up to you the choice. jaclaz

There is NO theory. You ALREADY posted, this is "your" thread: The present thread has NOTHING to do with your issue. You DO NOT need (and are kindly invited NOT to ) make multiple posts about your issue. jaclaz

Why don't you READ? This thread is about TWO specific problems (that are NOT the one you are having). ANYWAY there is a Read-me-first: and a FGA's (Frequently Given Answers) thread: that you should READ BEFORE posting here! (as CLEARLY stated on the top of this very Forum): From FGA's FGA #1: There are so many careless users that fail to do the above that there is even a THIRD sticky dedicated to the PCB replacement or "swap" approach, READ IT, NOW: jaclaz

I may be wrong, of course, but I seem to remember that that prevents the byte to be changed on *next* crash (as opposed to reset the byte already set) or maybe it simply tells the system to ignore the byte, but the filesystem is not fully "sound" (i.e. when manually running scandisk or a similar utility the "wrongly set" byte may still create a problem/trigger a surface scan. Anyway it is the same as the Edit in MSDOS.SYS: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/152404/en-us jaclaz

DELL's Recovery partitions (there are several "kinds" of them): http://www.goodells.net/dellutility/ http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/ I presume that the 7 based one is similar to the Vista one: http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/vista/ http://www.goodells.net/dellrestore/vista/vistarecovery.shtml but cannot say. If this is the case it is a "normal" 7 recovery partition as per above post by grabben jaclaz

No difference in point of view: read/write error -> (possibly) CRASH->(definitely) "not clean" shutdown->(definitely) Scandisk flag byte set generally: *whatever*-> "not clean" shutdown->(definitely) Scandisk flag byte set jaclaz

If you like to live dangerously you can manually hexedit the byte (which is in the FAT): http://thestarman.narod.ru/DOS/DirtyShutdownFlag.html AFAIK, this is not related to actual read/write error, but rather to "not clean" shutdown (which matches the "crashes" you report). jaclaz

About getting DATE this might be of interest: http://www.robvanderwoude.com/datetiment.php particularly DATEFMT.BAT jaclaz

The ST2000dl003 is NOT a 7200.11. IF it suffers from the same kind of problems, this is the only resource I know of (and links within it): jaclaz

Maybe a floppy image on a CD or on a USB stick might have been a more suited suggestion jaclaz

Hmm. You need to upload the images on a free image hosting website, NOT Imageshack as it seemingly has some limitations, and then post the links to the hosted pictures, and obviously NOT the path to the picture on your hard disk. jaclaz

START A NEW thread, please. Here: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/169-hard-drive-and-removable-media-issues/ Title it "Folders 0 byte s in size" jaclaz

Not at all my field, but wouldn't PuTTY do? http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/ jaclaz

yes i do have it , it's connector #1 ! AND #2 AND #3. Look, it's not difficult, if the actual CD/DVD has "protruding pins" it is non-standard (and possibly "type #1" will fit them), if it has connectors on the "outer edge" ALL among #1, #2 and #3 will do, as said they are ALL the same thing. jaclaz

I now see what you mean , type #1 seems like a "dual" kind of connector (with internal sockets for "pins" just like the ones used on 2.5" HDD) whilst #2 is ONLY a "slim ATAPI" one (i.e. the contacts are on the "outer edge"). ALL slimline drives I ever saw use these "outer edge connectors", compare with: http://www.laptopparts101.com/cd-dvd-optical-drive/ But you have on your hands the actual CD/DVD drive, don't you? The connector is actually called also "50 pin JAE" or "ATAPI-50" or "ATAPI JAE". http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/image/10312/ The actual "code" should be: "JAE KX15-50ELD1L" http://jae-connector.com/en/general_en.cfm?l_code=EN&series_code=KX14/KX15 http://jae-connector.com/en/pdf/2008-35-36-KX1415.pdf Example drive (page 13): http://www.prince-tech.com.tw/Eng/Pic/PicNdfUVp_66201.pdf jaclaz

Are you joking or what? Items #1 and #2 are the SAME thing (only difference is that one comes with a USB Y cable and one doesn't). Item #3 is STILL the SAME thing, only, being for a SUPER-Slim drive, the actual PCB is 10 mm in height instead of 13.5 mm. The use of ANY of the above in conjunction with a slim-line drive is allright. The only thing you need to check is power requirement, remember that a single USB port maxes out at 500 mA. What you should get would be INSTEAD of the connector, an actual external case for slimline drives (examples): http://www.amazon.co.uk/StarTech-com-Slimline-Optical-Drive-Enclosure/dp/B003GSCS2G http://www.walmart.com/ip/Startech-USB-to-Slimline-SATA-CD-DVD-Optical-Drive-Enclosure-SLMSOPTB/14860262 http://www.amazon.com/External-Enclosure-Laptop-Notebook-Connector/dp/B0011TR71Y Poorman's DYI: http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-USB-Slimline-Optical-Drive-Enclosure/ Rest assured that the actual slim IDE connector is standard. jaclaz

If I were you I would rather check for available solutions, first : http://www.rlmueller.net/freecode4.htm jaclaz