cluberti

There's an article about this for XP that may also apply to Vista: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...kb;EN-US;941729

If rolling the updates back doesn't fix it (also, what KBs are we talking about here?), then you'll have to go back to your changelog to see what else happened before the reboot. I get a lot of questions like that (I installed MS Update <x> and rebooted, and now <y> is broken!). However, maybe 1 out of 100 does the problem actually go away when the update <x> is removed - thus it was something else that took effect after the reboot, and having a changelog is a good way to track these down. If you don't have it, I might suggest booting in safe mode (w/out networking) and remove the devices that way, then reboot and reinstall drivers. Also, if you're getting complaints about major hardware changes, can you think of anything that would've installed / updated filter drivers (like antivirus, firewall, security CSPs, etc) that might have been installed or updated during the last uptime? That's the usual cause I see of this sort of behavior (device manager, networking problems, and need to reactivate / hardware issues).

Can you roll back the updates you installed?

I would say there are 2 big reasons, and one smaller one.The first big reason is, of course, utilizing memory above the 4GB boundary - RAM has gotten so cheap (relative to the rest of the machine's components) that having 8GB of RAM or more is affordable for most people building or buying a new machine. That means far more apps open/running at any time, less swapping, and much better performance overall (especially for memory-hungry apps, like photoshop for example). The next big reason would be utilizing your CPU(s) to the fullest. 32bit Windows running on a 64bit CPU only has access to the first 32 registers on the x64 CPU. Using an x64 OS, you get access to the other 32 registers as well, and this is the main reason most people find Windows and apps to "feel faster" (if only marginally) on an x64 system with x64 Windows vs x86 Windows. Things *do* execute faster, again if only marginally, when the CPU can be fully utilized. With 64bit apps starting to come down the line, having an x64 CPU and 8GB (or more) of RAM really does a good bit to "future-proof" your computer investment as well. You can run almost all x86 apps in WOW64 emulation, and of course you get the benefit of running x64 apps as they come down. The small reason I mention is upgrades. Win7 is going to be the last version of Windows that will ship with a 32bit client (Win7 server, aka Server 2008 R2, is already x64-only), meaning that if you like to upgrade your version of Windows you will need the x64 Vista or Win7 if you wish to upgrade to Win8 (whatever that will be named). Like I said it is a *small* reason, but it is something to consider. There are probably other reasons that may be important, but I wanted to address specifically the *hardware* reasons (and the small OS issue) that you would consider in an x86 vs x64 comparison.

No one is saying you're stupid (or if they are, they should stop NOW - I'm watching). However, saying that because *your* experience that businesses aren't going to "go anywhere near" Vista or that it's because the learning curve is too steep is just that - your opinion. Businesses haven't upgraded to Vista largely because they do things slowly (large businesses, and most small ones, aren't real keen on being on the cutting edge of technology), and it's also quite likely that businesses that aren't upgrading also have (older) apps that either don't run on Vista, or haven't been tested to see if they do. I do think businesses will largely skip Vista and get Win7, but more because a lot of businesses I see have just finished upgrading to XP in the last 2 - 3 years, and won't really be in the market for new Windows software until XP goes out of mainstream support this year (and even then, it'll be at least a year or two before mass migrations ensue, and that will be Win7's lifetime, not Vista).

As spam said, 32bit addressing means you can only "address" 4096MB of system memory. PAE allows the *usage* of memory above the 4GB barrier, but only by "mapping" that memory into a location under the 4096 barrier, meaning the memory can be used for data storage, but not code execution. Also, memory management for RAM "mapped" into a PAE window is the responsibility *entirely* of the app doing the mapping, making it an undertaking to actually do properly. Since it would take rewriting all the 32bit apps that we expect to be around for awhile yet to get into using PAE to get usage of >4GB RAM, why not rewrite these to 64bit anyway? If you're going to have to rewrite anyway to address >4GB RAM, it makes sense to do it as an x64 app, rather than a PAE 32bit app (with all the limitations and requirements on a PAE app that won't exist as an x64 app, like having to do your own memory management or not being able to execute code in the PAE window, or the memory management overhead hit in mapping and unmapping these regions over and over, etc).

Well, I'll admit you're partially correct. The 200MB partition is for EFI compatibility, and is thus a GPT-protected partition. This is actually created during initial creation of GPT-formatted disks during Vista setup, and thus is actually part of the GPT functionality in the system, but I will correct myself if we're going to be nit-picky - it is a 200MB system partition for compliance with Microsoft's stated point that the EFI system partition be the first partition on the disk. It's part of the initial creation of GPT volume(s) on the disk, but it's ultimate usage is to be the EFI system partition. The reason it's related to GPT-partitioning is that an EFI system partition MUST be on a GPT-formatted volume, hence my reply.

Those are MSDN ISO titles for the Win7 beta, and the one available since Wednesday (build 7000) is en_windows_7_beta_dvd_x86_x15-29073.iso (at least for x86), and was actually built on December 12th, 2008 (hence why there's nothing "new" since this was posted). The first one you listed is a checked build, and you would only need that if you were going to run it with a debugger attached (for debugging, of course). Assuming you aren't debugging, get the non-checked build - it's build 7000.

It's a function of the GPT partitioning system, it's normal. You will have a 200MB partition with Win7, period.

Correct - that error is telling you the format bitness (x86) of the .dll it's loading is invalid, and the error is ERROR_BAD_FORMAT: ERROR_BAD_FORMAT winerror.h # An attempt was made to load a program with an incorrect # format.

Depends on the controller and how it creates the arrays. More expensive cards store the data on the disks and on the array (and are battery-backed), most cheaper cards will write that data only on the disks and have no backup. However, in both scenarios, in general you will need at least the same type of card to recreate/restore the array, and in some cases (usually seen with older Adaptec/Promise cards) if the card itself dies, the array is not recoverable from the disks unless it was a mirrored array (like a RAID1).

There's a setting called "Show Pictures" in Tools > Internet Options > Advanced > Multimedia - if not checked, this is the behavior you'll see.

Is the service there on a clean media install? If you used nlite or similar, we should probably move this there.

Wouldn't really know where to begin, then. The RPC Locator service uses %systemroot%\system32\locator.exe, which relies on advapi32.dll, kernel32.dll, msvcrt.dll, and ntdll.dll at the bare minimum. You also would need the registry entries under HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\RPCLocator to actually see / interact with the service as well. I would instead suggest using a legit copy of Windows instead of hacking with an illegal copy downloaded from the 'net, which also violates board rules discussing warez.

Poxy settings in IE are global, not per-connection, so this is not possible in Windows with wininet-based browsers like IE. I don't think other browsers allow this either, but I could be wrong.

Was this XP x64 source modified in any way before you installed it, or was this installed straight from a Windows CD?

And almost no one purchased the N versions of Windows. It may be that "modular" versions of Windows really aren't that big a deal, outside of tech circles like this one.

Shutting down, flamewars are not acceptable and this has become less a discussion than a trollfest. If you want to troll, at least troll Vista in the Vista forums, not in the General Discussion or Microsoft Beta forums. [Closed].

You should indeed see it as "Remote Procedure Call (RPC) Locator" in the list.

Describe doesn't respond - does the desktop appear once it's back up? Does ctrl+alt+del not do anything at this point, etc?

If you have a retail version, you get free installation support. Call (866) 834-8317.

Check your PM.

Do not double-post. Closing this topic, leaving the other open.

Do NOT double-post.

I have access to a reliable source as well, and Peter Gutmann, on this anyway, IS a raving lunatic. And yes, this source is about as accurate as it gets.