jaclaz

Something is really strange, (hd0) is the stick, and (rd) is the grub4dos built in ramdisk. Your SSD device is NOT detected by grub4dos! Are you sure you don't need a disconnect/connect or reboot or something the like? Does that thingy has anything "strange" that can be set in BIOS? jaclaz

OK, defintiely it is not .net, and also not C#. What did the good Microsoft guys use to write their OSes? Quick Basic? Plain C? C++? jaclaz

Try another one: chainloader ( [TAB] You are pressing the [TAB] key and NOT the [ENTER] key, aren't you? jaclaz

That's strange, the BOOT.INI seems fine, as it points to first partition of first disk, which should be the SSD (once the stick is not attached). grub4dos seems to be able to detect only the USB stick (I presume that the device is a 2.039.869.440 i.e. 2 Gb stick partitioned with wimb's or steve6375's tool, as it has a second partiton type 21, FAT16 formatted). Still in grub4dos, try: [ENTER] and find ( [TAB] and post result, it is almost as the SSD is NOT detected as a hard disk. jaclaz

Theoretically a "recovery DVD" should do a Recovery, i.e. NO matter what is on the hard disk make it exactly as it were at the time the "snapshot" was taken. But there should have been also a "base recovery DVD" (if not given together with the PC) capable of restoring to "factory", including the hidden partition. Is it possible that user completed only a part of the creating "recovery DVD"? i.e. by snapshotting only his "user" partiton and not the hidden one? The whole thing about this "stupid" procedure is a logic loophole, you do a "backup" and the only way to test if it went allright and it works is by testing it overwriting your current working partition(s). If for any reasons something went wrong when saving, you cannot restore properly and you are stuck. jaclaz

The first is a USB to TTL. If you don't mind some work with the soldering iron, yes. The second is a RS232 to TTL, actually successfully used by the maker of a "sister" guide: http://www.msfn.org/board/solution-seagate...-page-1762.html http://www.mapleleafmountain.com/seagatebrick.html Being notoriously cheap, if I were US based I would use one of this (example) USB to TTL: http://cgi.ebay.com/USB-To-TTL-Converter-M...id=p3286.c0.m14 You should check what you have as an option on e-bay, these ones seems nice too: http://cgi.ebay.it/CP2102-USB-To-TTL-Conve...id=p3286.c0.m14 http://cgi.ebay.it/CP2102-USB-TTL-RS232-Se...id=p3286.c0.m14 or one of these, RS232 to TTL: http://cgi.ebay.it/MAX232-RS232-Serial-to-...id=p3286.c0.m14 It all depends on what is best for your country, sometimes you can find better prices on e-bay than on local (or national internet) stores, sometimes it is the other way round). Just for fun I would like to point out how this smart guy here: http://cgi.ebay.it/INTERFACCIA-RS232-3V-TT...id=p3286.c0.m14 sells for €39+5,50 P&P=44.50 (including the "special" cable to connect to Seagates) an interface remarkably similar to this one: http://cgi.ebay.it/INTERFACCIA-RS232-TTL-3...34.c0.m14.l1262 which he sells for €15+2.50 P&P=17.50 In my book, it means that the difference betweeen this: http://i21.ebayimg.com/01/i/000/97/24/62c5_1.JPG and this: http://i.ebayimg.com/07/!BSujW-wBGk~&a...jtLnJQ~~_12.JPG i.e a cable, a CR2032 and it's holder+ the HD connector is valued €27.00 It is worth to mention this part: http://cgi.ebay.it/INTERFACCIA-RS232-3V-TT...id=p3286.c0.m14 Bolded Italic part translating to: The connector on the HD side is an original 2 mm pitch original american, this is important as otherwise there is a risk of losing the data on the HD jaclaz

One of these? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314477/en-us It is possibly a mis-entry in BOOT.INI. Do you have "other" mass storage devices (that could "confuse" the program)? Try booting from the stick, and at grub4dos, press "c" to enter command line mode. Issue a few commands: geometry (hd0) [ENTER] geometry (hd1) [ENTER] geometry(hd2) [ENTER] Post results. Post also contents of the BOOT.INI on the SSD. jaclaz

You can PXE boot allright. Browse around here: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showforum=12 There are a few different ways. jaclaz

There is ONLY one (reliable) source, the Homepage: http://driverpacks.net/ jaclaz

NOT what you aslked, but maybe this: http://www.msfn.org/board/win-nt-bt-can-omitted-t131103.html http://www.msfn.org/board/win-nt-bt-can-om...03-page-11.html might be of interest to you (malformed names), it could solve partially some of your problems. jaclaz

NO, it won't let you create multiple partitions as well, (I mean with Disk Management), it behaves EXACTLY like XP in this regards, but it may behave slightly differently during textmode setup or even GUI setup, I cannot swear by it. Hmm, I don't know. The mui "road" is reserved to particular builds of XP, I never happened to see any reference to an "alternative" way, even because SYSTEM folder change names in "normal" different languages installs. Everything is possible (probably). Once and if you have more details we would be happy to know more on the topic. About Windows 7, a possible way is going along the path wimb suggests here: http://www.msfn.org/board/install-xp-usb-a...sb-t121446.html (point 5.) basically INSTEAD of "running CD/DVD like", you install the OS from an already booted Preinstallation Environment jaclaz

Point is that REDISTRIBUTION of files is PROHIBITED, or at least it was last time I checked EULA's. In other words, and please more experienced in this sector members do correct me if I am wrong, there is not anything wrong in you USING "other" files as long as you use an original licensed key, BUT the one GIVING you the files is breaking the EULA. jaclaz

To expand on the above: Besides VFD.EXE by Ken Kato: http://chitchat.at.infoseek.co.jp/vmware/vfd.html there are several other "virtual disk drivers" capable of loading a floppy image, most noticeably IMDISK: http://www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showforum=59 More drivers can be found here: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1507 Point is if they will be loaded EARLY ENOUGH during the boot process of the GUI setup to be available when the setup asks for drivers in A:\ and HOW to install/setup them to achieve this (hypothetical at the moment) result. As I see it you have five possible choices right now: integrate the source with the drivers buy a USB floppy drive start fiddling/experimenting with the mentioned drivers start fiddling/experimenting with the HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL drivers: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?...ic=8168&hl= http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?...ic=8804&hl= wait for either of the above two drivers to be developed/tested (and hopefully be working). <-since they re-hook the grub4dos virtual drive they will be very handy #1 is guaranteed to work and it is relatively easy, as it is well documented Easier would probably be #2, but you have to part from a few bucks. #3,#4 and #5 may work in a few minutes, a few hours or a few days/weeks/months So, all in all, and being cheap, I would go for #1, as cdob suggested. jaclaz

I tho h cou ge hal answ .... jac

Been notoriously cheap , I guess I can comment about this one. I don't remember Microsoft giving away Xp or Vista licenses for FREE, nor they are probably going to do it now for Windows 7. The above should be rectified in something like : the money you previously gave MS for the privilege of using one of their OS (directly by buying a license or indirectly buying a PC with included XP or Vista) now buys less "accessories". as you can see the word "FREE" has disappeared completely , the sentence keeping more or less the same meaning. Now a personal opinion, I have NOT any definitive one on Windows 7, as I haven't had the occasion to test it accurately, but while I tend to believe the opinion of a few chaps here that have a record of being objective and knowledgeable, and thus support this new OS for a (or more than one) REASON(s) I have the instinctive feeling that a large number are all for Windows 7 for the exact same reasons they were favourable to XP over 2K (and NO, you cannot use as a comparison term nowadays XP SP3 on modern hardware, you have to compare XP "GOLD" with the hardware that was common in 2001) and later to Vista over XP (just following the lead). Have you ever tried running "GOLD" XP on a machine with DOUBLE the minimum recommended by MS RAM and TWICE the minimum processor speed?: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865/en-us 256 Mb and 600 Mhz processor and on the same machine 2K? For the record minimum requirements for 2K: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/304297/en-us Have you ever tried running Vista http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-v...quirements.aspx on one of the PC's it was initially shipped with, typically with 1 Ghz processor and 1 Gb of RAM? Windows 7 has the same theoretical requirements of Vista (which is a VERY good thing ): http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/systemrequirements and everyone reports that is faster than Vista on same hardware, this, as I see it, is an important change in the direction of the development, expecially because modern "common" hardware is around 3 Ghz and 2 to 4 Gb of RAM. If I were malicious, I could hypotize that it all was a conspiracy to "push" the installed base, exasperated by the sluggishness of Vista, to update hardware, and once this has been done forcibly, get out of the hat an efficient rabbit OS. jaclaz

An ice cream sandwich! Yes, a thiiin slice of bread between two conspicuous slabs of icecream.... jaclaz

I thought the "zealots" were saying 7 is the best thing since the invention of icecream. Which of course creates the foundations for a good ol' sliced bread vs. icecream discussion. jaclaz

It was a joke , a (friendly) retaliation for this: http://www.msfn.org/board/needing-help-xp-...303-page-5.html Everyone should be free to use whatever OS and programs he likes, no matter what other people think it is "better" or "faster" or "safer" or "whatever". jaclaz

Since I happen to have a surplus attribute in my first drawer: http://www.msfn.org/board/needing-help-xp-...303-page-5.html , I will call the above "ambiguous". Do you mean that: Or you mean that you think that: Or you mean that you know that: Also, how big is "a lot"? Does it include USB and Firewire Mass Storage devices? And eSata? Or only HID devices? ....ambiguous.... Hey, it didn't have time enough for even cooling down a bit in my drawer, it came back as hot as it was received.... jaclaz

2. and 3. are NOT really "needed", partitions can be primary/primary or primary/logical_volume_inside_extended Actually two primaries will be easier to setup. But it is also possible to have logical_volume_inside_extended/logical_volume_inside_extended or logical_volume_inside_extended/primary Each of the combinations above may have some limitations/need for some "tricks" however. If you want to have each OS get C: you simply need to hide other partitions when you run the install program. And of course yes, you need something else to partition the drive, but diskpart from a PE is allright, no need to buy additional software just for this. And 1. would seem to me "counterproductive", unless there is a misunderstanding , if you: Install XP on first primary partition, lets call' it FIRST partition later install Vista on first logical volume inside extended, lets call it SECOND partition the "normal" result should be: Under XP: FIRST = C: SECOND = D: Under Vista: FIRST = C: SECOND = D: I.e. same drive gets same letter no matter which OS is booted. I thought you wanted the opposite. Or is this a "special" feature of Vista? At least OS up to server 2003 would behave as I described. jaclaz

Yep. jaclaz

"1" means "original XP", "100" means service pack 1 (or later): http://www.msfn.org/board/switches-txtsetu...852-page-3.html Thus the ones to be commented should be the ones with "1" (pardon me the pun ). What makes me a bit dubious is the different "target" (Destination Directory) of these two couple of lines : I would anyway try commenting the "1"'s. jaclaz

You miss some history. . Basically the "Install XP from USB" that started it all: http://www.msfn.org/board/install-xp-usb-f157.html and that was, as the name implies, initially aimed at XP only, was more or less originated by this: http://www.msfn.org/board/installing-unatt...ive-t81788.html http://www.msfn.org/board/installing-unatt...788-page-6.html Of the 5 "hinted" methods, #1 was already documented/possible (with a few limitations) #2 was as well known/reknown, and all efforts went in #3 and #4, here: http://www.msfn.org/board/boot-install-usb-key-t61384.html The #5 was set aside, and it has been found a solution for it only very recently, thanks to cdob: http://www.msfn.org/board/install-xp-lite-...pid-876839.html Once found a possible solution for XP, which actually resulted in something somewhat midway between #3 and #4, wimb "went back" to #2 (which, though reknown, was not easily replicable by people not familiar with BartPE or Winbuilder - please read familiar with PE 1.x) and provided an easy way (using the LiveXP project of Winbuilder) to implement it. Later the problem of Vista (and Windows 7 which is very similar in this respect to Vista) was put on the table. After finding a solution conceptually similar to the already seen #3/#4 above, something correspondent to #2 above was devised: boot a PE (2.x or 3.x this time) and from it install Vista/7. The given thread: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=5306 Explains in detail how to use a PE 2.x to achieve that. You need to follow the given links and get familiar with the WAIK and Winbuilder to be able to create either a PE 2.x: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=7053 or a VistaPE: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showforum=51 or a PE 3.x: http://www.boot-land.net/forums/index.php?showforum=91 Explanation of numbers: Microsoft released initially WinPE versions 1.2 (XP based) then WinPE 1.5 and 1.6 (XP or Server 2003 based) since originally the use of WinPE was reserved to an "elite", Bart Lagerwej developed PEbuilder, an app to create a PE from XP or Server 2003 sources. Later Nuno Brito wrote batcher openbuilder Winbuilder a more "generic" engine capable to replicate the needed functions, and a number of projects based on XP and Server 2003 files were developed. Everything built taking as Source XP or 2003 files is "generally speaking" a PE 1.x. Together with Vista, Microsoft released a ne version of WinPE, PE 2.x ??, a Pre-installation Environment similar to the above but based on Vista/Server 2008 files. Projects were made for winbuilder to replicate this environment. Everything built taking Vista or Server 2008 files is "generally speaking" a PE 2.x. With the advent of Windows 7, Microsoft released a new version of WinPE, PE 3.x ??, a Pre-installation Environment based on Windows 7 files. Projects were made for Winbuilder to make use of the latter. Everything built taking Windows 7 files is "generally speaking" a PE 3.x. You will need some time to get familiar with the building of a PE, being it a 1.x, a 2.x or a 3.x. jaclaz

Replied there. Doubtful whether it will actually "help". My personal theory is that noone ever used that command in the last, say, 10 years, or the very few that actually did did not bother to post anything about their experience, exception made for this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub/+bug/220543 The point I try to raise is WHAT is a "real" situation where the command is useful/used? jaclaz

What the "minwin guy" said is slightly different, a substitute for winlogon.exe, called minlogon.exe actually exists, and it is 100% usable on a "normal" XP. So, THERE IS A WAY, using minlogon.exe to do this on XP. The "minlogon.exe" component is part of XP embedded, for which you can buy a License. XP embedded is also available as a trial download, so you may also try it. It does not exist AFAIK a similar Freeware/Open Source/Redistributable substitute for Winlogon.exe, though. jaclaz