jaclaz

Not what you asked, still ...: https://openmeetings.apache.org/ jaclaz

You posed the question in what appears (to me) a strange way , it is not a double or nothing (Acrobat Reader DC - IMHO a stupidly large mass of bloat- or Sumatra - IMHO the most minimalistic reader) game, there are many free readers besides them, apart the ones embedded in Chrome or Mozilla. Only to give you an example, I normally use on XP the Foxit one (in a rather oldish version, 2.3 that however fits my needs just fine), but I am pretty sure that there are a number of other suitable softwares around. jaclaz

Quick recap: 1) if it is "LBA0", it is bricked 2) if it is "BUSY", it is bricked 3) if the BIOS sees it, possibly with its full capacity, then it is NOT bricked (anymore) The state in which it is is definitely "NOT bricked", but this doesn't mean that there is not some other issue (hopefully a small corruption that can be sometimes - but not alwasy - fixed ). See an example of success: and one of failure: In case, start a NEW thread asking for help to attempt recovering the partition(s) on the disk. jaclaz

From the link just posted to MDGX: Which makes a lot of sense, it is faster to load a single file (not compressed archive) than a number of files and the overhead of uncompressing on-the-fly the archive (single file) may make things slower, particularly with the limited amount of memory and CPU that was available at the time. But no, there is no particularly bad consequence, though "mixed mode" is risky, as a newer driver may be automatically replaced by an older version in some cases: jaclaz

Advised by whom? jaclaz

The VMM32 can ve unpacked and re-packed, still just in case: http://www.mdgx.com/98-3.htm Scroll down to "WIN98 VXD BUG": jaclaz

Naah, no bazooka, they will use a laser-guided Destructo-Beam, which is one of the best possible uses of .NET: http://www.toodarkpark.org/computers/humor/shoot-self-in-foot.html jaclaz

Usual reference to the "innards" of vmm32.vxd (in case it is useful): http://www.helpwithwindows.com/techfiles/vmm32.html jaclaz

Well, the real issue is that they call the horror they devised as "elegant", the C: (what an actual Microsoft Programmer would properly - please read as "improperly" - call "boot" volume ) is nothing but a conventional way to access a disk extent that they decided to "tag" - in order to keep compatibility with MS-DOS conventions - with a "name" or "drive letter" [1] [2] The whole concept of GUID for volumes (and the assignement through mountvol), set aside the actual way disk signature and offset/length of volume for drive letter assignment work seem like non-existing if you read the post (actually the needed clarification in answer to a very legit question since the actual announcement missed any of the details). jaclaz [1] And yes, besides multi-hard disks system they seemingly ignore also the concept of multi-partitioning/multi-volumes, for these new guys you seemingly should have only one accessible volume, called "C:", which BTW is also the negation of the ONLY (IMHO) real advantage of GPT style disks (apart the 4 TiB size limit that is a non-problem since SSD became common and it won't be one until commonly used SSD's will go beyond 4 TiB) which is that of having the possibiliy of having a virtually endless number primary partitions (i.e. without the risks connected with the EMBR chain neded for logical volumes inside extended) [2] only for the record, since NT 4.00 NO install of NT based system I ever did ever used C:\ as the drive letter for the actual "system" volume (the one that MS call backwards "boot").

Yep, that's a serious mis-representation, FranceBB has ONLY two machines with PosReady 2009 running. jaclaz

It's queer. Do check (with a magnifying glass) that the inside of the slot is clean, that pins are not bent and that the lever is not damaged. It is similar to this kind of lever/slot: https://www.compuram.de/blog/en/installing-new-memory-modules-a-short-guide/ right? The lever is self-locking, i.e. when you insert the stick, it makes pressure on the lower part of the lever and makes it close, it is possible that something prevents the stick from going "full in" (and thus locking the lever) or the lever (or the hole on which the lever pivots) is damaged. In theory the lever is more an "extraction" lever, i.e. the RAM stick should stay in place even if the lever is broken, but it is entirely possible that the slot pins are not (anymore) as "springy" as they should be. You can replace the lever (taking one from a dead motherboard), but of course you cannot easily replace the connector. The poor man solution is to wrap an elastic band around the slot, keeping the levers closed, but it is only temporary, as the rubber will soon "cook" itself and break. A more proper solution is (it depends on the specific slot, thickness of the ram module, etc. ) to build an external clamp of sorts. jaclaz

Wait a minute, The LoneCrusader/rloew patch linked to by dencorso: is intended to be run (among other options) from a bootable floppy, if getting the hard disk out of the laptop is complicated, why doing it that way? It would probably be possible to run it now or - even if it doesn't work - restart the install from fresh and install the patch during this new install. jaclaz

There has been a post today on blogs technet that could have been posted on April 1: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2019/01/07/windows-10-and-reserved-storage/ In a nutshell, not happy enough with totally ruining Windows, in order to fix one of the issues/shortcoming of Windows 10 (and its stupid updates) they are going to ruin also NTFS: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2019/01/07/windows-10-and-reserved-storage/ Besides the forced requisition of 7-10 GB of users' storage space (that may be debatable, but surely makes the Windows 10 install footprint some 30%-50% bigger, to the delight of anyone running it on small amount storage devices such as tablets or on devices with no replaceable storage) they are doing it using some form of changes to NTFS: i.e. basically to the only thing that is still (IMHO) "rock solid" and "time proven", with the additional benefit that each and every data recovery tool (and possibly even built-in tools like chkdsk and similar of previous versions of Windows - that may still access the same disk/volumes in multibooting scenario's will likely have issues). jaclaz

Hmmm. Let me see. Under Windows everyone uses Chrome or Chorome/Chromium engine based browser. (exception made for those insisting on using Mozilla Firefox, all in all a small amount of people [1]). Noone uses Edge. Whatever undocumented features of Edge (if any ) *somehow* facilitating MS operations is lost. The whole plan on world domination and stuff through the Windows 10 pushing is likely failing (besides the total defeat on phones) because even those that for one reason or the other are using Windows 10 ar not using Edge and nowadays a large part of the time spent on a computer is through its browser. Idea , let's make a new browser similar to or nearly identical to Chrome (possibly while keeping the same *whatever* undocumented features we like to have). Wait, this would mean actually writing lots of code, why not using the actual same engine as Chrome? jaclaz [1] and with the exception of a few old dinosaurs like yours truly that still use good ol' browsers (with some limitations).

... and remember that in the good ol'times the successor to the Sinclair ZX Spectrum was the QL, i.e. Quantum Leap, and it was actually for the time an incredibly good computer ... jaclaz

That would be Hel , it is actually hardware abstraction layer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_abstraction jaclaz

Maybe you are thinking of blackwingcat ? Maybe these? http://blog.livedoor.jp/blackwingcat/archives/1165914.html jaclaz

Sure , but specifically we do have the relevant page archived (thanks to the Wayback Machine) to give some context (and attribution of the "discovery" to cdob): https://web.archive.org/web/20160715151517/http://www.911cd.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=21702&st=129 jaclaz

I can only add that it works in DOS AND in NT systems, original release post: http://reboot.pro/topic/8528-how-to-patch-fat32-boot-sector/?p=73205 jaclaz

@dencorso Well, Ranish is DOS, I thought that the request was for something running under Windows XP. @Multibooter Yes, besides your (and other) DELL's, a number of IBM/LENOVO's and some HP's are known to use the 240 heads. But - again - if it is a primary partition, you can use *any* tool to create it manually and then use another program (like the suggested Ridgecrop's FAT32FORMAT) to later format it. If you want to go the "manual" way, you might find of use my little spreadsheet: http://reboot.pro/topic/2959-chs-lba-translations/ http://reboot.pro/topic/2959-chs-lba-translations/?p=74116 and/or my batch (though it won't work directly for a DDOed drive, it should be able to create the partition entry data, then you can use tiny hexer or another disk editor to copy it to the partition table): http://reboot.pro/topic/3191-mbrbatch-001-alpha/ last "original" (working fine on XP): http://reboot.pro/topic/3191-mbrbatch-001-alpha/?p=70584 the "modified/last" version by Lancelot (hopefully running on later systems and x64) can be found here: http://reboot.pro/topic/20213-found-mbrbatch-lancelots-version-x86x64/ jaclaz

You see, most "partitioning software" are (right or wrong) using a "Pareto principle". They are (not all of them, the best ones, a number of them are "terrible") only good in a large number of cases but tend to fail in some "edge" or "non-standard conditions". In this specific case it is not an actual limitation of the software, it is the way the whole stuff work which is problematic, it is basically a "chain of lies". What happens is that the actual hard disk (the actual thingy with spinning platters) actually has 255 heads (not really, but the hard disk on board controller exposes the actual internal arrangement, which is unknown as 255), the BIOS lies to the software/OS telling it has 240 heads and the DOS/9x software/OS cannot but adapt to this wrong info, whilst any NT system will blatantly ignore whatever the BIOS says and re-gather the info provided by the hard disk on board controller. The software usually creates partitions aligned to the cylinder, i.e. with "end sector" as the max sector per head on the max head (which derives from the geometry of the device), this was the old "MS standard" up to XP, whilst newer softwares would align to either "MB", which is the "new" MS standard starting with Vista or you can select between the two . So, in theory, you would need on NT a "filter driver" lying to the software in the same way the BIOS lies. For these cases the way out is manually making a partition table, nothing particularly difficult as long as you are wanting to make Primary Partiitions only, a bit more complex if you are wanting to make more complex setups involving Extended and Logical Volumes inside it. A better (easier) solution is using a virtual disk driver, under XP you should have no issues in using the VDK by Ken Kato, using a .pln descriptor file to set the "wanted" geometry, but unfortunately the VDK driver "hooks" at a level where, while it creates a "physicaldrive", this drive is not seen in Disk Management, a different partitioning tool may still (or it may not) see the virtual disk and be capable of operating on it, and - besides - the tool may well have been coded to have 255/63 as "fixed" geometry. I don't remember right now about any partitioning software/tool where you can choose/set the heads/sector geometry under XP, though I seem to remember there was a nice little tool that allowed "manual" or "almost manual" operation . But what would be the "actual use" of this tool? Remember that if you use a "wrong" HS geometry you will need to patch the FAT32 or the NTFS PBR to remove CHS access, because it won't boot XP or other NT systems on a machine that reports a different geometry, see: http://blog.clemens.endorphin.org/2007/12/removing-chs-based-access-from-windows_3170.html jaclaz

Are you sure it belongs here and not - just saying - "Funny Farm"? https://msfn.org/board/forum/20-funny-farm/ jaclaz

Not to be grumpier than usual, but the specific issue has already been diagnosed EXACTLY (and how to fix it provided) no need for further speculations: And - for the record - the partition is actually active (in practice it is the only thing that is "right": https://msfn.org/board/topic/178018-windows-98-hard-drive-cloning/?do=findComment&comment=1157698 This said, good to see you around . jaclaz

Only for the record, a number of Commercial programs, particularly of the DOS/WIN9x era, use hidden sectors or volume serials (and what not) to "validate", so if you have any of these you can only do a "clone". jaclaz

SCOOP! Destro is affected by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydactyly jaclaz