cluberti

so the new disk has 20GB more.Well, if you do create a RAID1 from two non-identically sized drives, the array will revert to using the smaller drive's size and the rest of the space on the larger drive will become useless. That's OK if you're OK with that, but just be aware. Well, I can't say for certain what will happen, because it's up to the RAID controller software to determine whether or not it'll be able to create an array from an existing drive without causing data loss. I would read up very closely on the options for creating a new array, RAID1, to be absolutely sure you can use the BIOS to create an array from an existing drive and a new one, without wiping out the data. There are controllers that can do the creation from an existing drive, and some that do not - make sure you know which one yours is before going forward . " what do you mean by bugcheck? could i not just tell the BIOS to boot from the original drivebugcheck=bluescreen. Windows keeps track of the controller and drive number that it boots from, and if either of these change, you'll get a bugcheck stating that the boot controller could not be found. On some of these motherboards, when you enable the RAID controller, it no longer boots as IDE and the controller "changes" to Windows. I'm warning you to beware of this, and have a good and tested backup in case this fails in this way. Changing an installed copy of Windows from a standard drive to a RAID array isn't something to be done lightly.

I did it already, and since I wanted to reproduce the problem, I fired up WoW. I did follow the procedure to have a complete system dump, I opened the case just to make sure it was not a heat problem, turned the fans to max rpm, and after a few minutes, the whole system froze. I then pressed Right Control + Scroll Lock twice as it was indicated but no luck, I restarted the system and I didnt find any dump file or logs of anything, so I dont know where the problem comes from. Well, if you held down the right-hand side CTRL key whilst you pressed scroll lock twice, and you are indeed using a PS/2 keyboard (and not a USB keyboard), the box should have crashed if the kernel was still running. Again, if you are certain that you held down the right-hand CTRL key while pressing scroll lock twice with a PS/2 keyboard and the box didn't crash, this indicates a hardware problem (the PS/2 bus is an interrupt bus, meaning that even if the software is hung, if the kernel is running it WILL handle the interrupt and crash the box - if the kernel itself is hung and interrupts aren't being serviced, it's 99% of the time a hardware problem when the keyboard dump doesn't work).

From the Vista EULA you can get from Microsoft (and should have come in the packaging with the copy of Vista you have, btw), under the section (3) entitled "ADDITIONAL LICENSING REQUIREMENTS AND/OR USE RIGHTS": It's been 10 connections since NT4, and I doubt it'll change anytime soon (if at all, ever).

If you have a PS/2 keyboard attached (or one you can attach temporarily), you could configure the box for a complete dump, and then dump it via the keyboard the next time it hangs (follow the instructions in the "Memory dump of the entire system" section).

Part of the problem is that newegg is putting the OEM SKU and part number label on it, but not saying for which version of Windows in the description (although they do in the article of sale itself, it's server 2008 standard). The part number means it's a 1 pack (1 copy/license of Server 2008 standard) with 5 client access licenses (it can be accessed by up to 5 clients before you need to buy more CALs).

ping -a does do a ptr lookup on the IP address. He stated that didn't work, hence 192.168.1.5 doesn't have a ptr (or a forward A) record.

I hate to state the obvious, but you're sure that on these machines, if you don't install an nLite'd copy of Windows XP it works?

When I'm stuck on a windows box to do these sorts of things, I like using this particular scanner.

Hm - well, your wireless isn't picking up an IP address then. Perhaps you can give it a static IP address by modifying the TCP/IP properties of the network connection to get it online. Otherwise, you'd have to get a network trace via netmon or wireshark of the interface as you start it up (to see if it sends a DHCP Inform packet, and whether or not it gets a response) before I could help with that further. I'd suggest, if you are not averse to it, that the quickest fix is to check the IP information (ipconfig /all) on the desktop that works, and then replicate that (changing just the IP address to another IP in the same range) as that will make the laptop not reliant on DHCP. However, if you travel to other networks with this wireless, that will obviously not allow you to use DHCP elsewhere, so that's the drawback of that.

Ok i have a server which has 1 SATA HD and WS2003 installed on it. I have another SATA HD that i would like to make use of, so i connected this HD to a RAID port. I would like this 2nd drive to mirror the 1st HD........Is this possible? Let me know if this is still unclear? Much better . If you are talking about Windows RAID, then no - Windows 2003 cannot create a RAID volume on a boot / Windows volume that isn't RAID (this is software RAID, mind you). As to the hardware RAID, this would be a function of the hardware RAID controller's BIOS - if you can go into that BIOS and create a RAID1 volume of 2 disks without deleting the contents of one of those disks (i.e. it can create a RAID1 volume from an existing disk and an identical new disk), then that would be the way to do it. However, if this causes Windows to boot from a new disk controller, this could cause you to bugcheck as the disk controller would be different.

If you create a RAID1 array that contains the Windows partition and the directory services data, then the RAID controller would have created a mirror on the second drive, and yes, it would take over if the first drive failed. However, if you're talking about moving the current data from a single drive to a new RAID that will be the boot volume, that's different. I guess I'm still not clear on your actual question.

Not entirely true, at least speaking about Windows - Windows Server versions that are 2003/2008 Enterprise or higher (or 2000 Advanced or Datacenter) can use /PAE to allow addressing of memory higher than 4GB, although usage is limited to storage of data, no code can execute above the 4GB boundary.

There isn't an equivalent - nbtstat is very limited in Windows compared to nmblookup on *nix hosts. However, I still suggest a network scan of that IP to see what it reports, if anything.

And there's your problem - you're getting an autoconfig IP address. Is the DHCP server on your router enabled? Seems like the answer is no...

It depends - if the paths to the files are incredibly long (200+ characters), or have invalid characters, etc, this can cause an otherwise full folder or path to become inaccessible or invisible. Converting to NTFS won't solve this particular type of issue, although I don't know in your case if this applies or not.

Yes - torrenting isn't bad per-se like any P2P package, but the product is a commercial one and is non-free. Therefore, get it from the vendor and do not use alternate means (like file-sharing), as this almost always means an illegal copy (not always, but most of the time). Therefore, we consider using torrents to get commercial packages warez, yes. Do not do it again.

OK, so you've got a connection. Can you post/check what ipconfig /all tells you in a command prompt?

Actually, the card is a DX 8 part. Only DX 9 cards and higher will run Aero on RTM/SP1 builds, the beta hacks are long disabled.

Are they both recognized in the BIOS during POST?

XP and 2000 share the same kernel (basically), with XP SP1 and SP2's additional security in XP. If you are talking about apps that don't need a version of DirectX that won't run on 2000, or don't need a specific XP API that doesn't exist on 2000, the app should run just fine on both platforms.

NT will see what the BIOS says is not reserved. Therefore, if the BIOS reserves 768MB of RAM, then the OS will see 3.25 of 4GB. This is well documented here and elsewhere, so please use the search functions in the future. As to video, the 9x drivers are far easier to write as they have direct access to the hardware - NT and it's kernel and HAL make it harder to write "unofficial" drivers, although it can be done if a dev wants to do some reverse engineering to figure it out. However, the previous universal driver link above is your best bet for now. Remember, use search .

If it's in DNS, you could do a ping -a 192.168.1.5. Otherwise, you'll want to use a network scanner to do some sniffing of the box to see what secrets it reveals.

They don't fix monitors with a dead pixel or two by default, but being a royal PITA got me a new 2407 when I had that (before the "new" warranty statement), just like with any other Dell component - persisitence pays when you've got something from Dell that works, but not 100% the way you expect. Eventually they'll "pay out" to get you to go away, at least that's been my experience with their desktops and the higher-end LCDs.

a 32bit NT-based OS can see up to 4GB of RAM, if the motherboard supports it. Driver support ended some years ago by pretty much all vendors (including nVidia), and most newer video cards (including the one you question) do not have drivers specifically for NT4 anymore. Windows NT will see dual-core processors as separate processors (as Windows 2000 did), up to 2 cores, I believe. I haven't tried it in a few years, honestly, so my memory is a bit fuzzy.

Profiles themselves are not compatible between Vista (version 2.0) and XP/2003/older (version 1.0) profiles. If the profiles are just redirected folders, however, and not actual roaming profiles, you'll find it should work without any major issues. If the versions of IE are the same (IE7) on both, it will make favorites redirection easier. Just don't try to redirect cookies and temp internet files - that can potentially cause corruption issues. You can't upgrade from one product version to another with just a product key. You would have to do an upgrade install over the 2008 standard install from the enterprise media, and provide a new product key of course. No, you cannot upgrade x86 systems to x64, you HAVE to do a clean install.