cluberti

HDD hardware failure, yes, but filesystem failure, no. Although if you can boot, the filesystem isn't totally gone, and if you can boot to a rescue CD or the recovery console you may be able to get yourself back with as much as a chkdsk...

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/ms795746.aspx The values mean: 0xC0000005 - access denied (something running in kernel tried to do something that was disallowed, usually attempt to read or write from an address range that is invalid or protected). 0x00000399 - The address where the exception occurred, this is at byte 921 in process space. This is definitely near the beginning of process space, so it's either a module trying to load in an invalid location, or a loaded module trying to modify kernel table structures (protected). This is either a REALLY bad driver, or it's malicious. 0xF898962c - The address of the exception record, not useful without a dump to view the exception record. However, knowing this is a 0xc0000005, it's likely just going to give a memory read or write failure. 0xF8989328 - The address of the context record, also not useful without a dump to view the context record. This might give up the driver, or assembly code, that caused the failure. But again, not really useful. If you're having trouble even in safe mode, I'd have to suspect either malicious activity, or a base-level driver causing the violation. Anything on the box change recently that you're aware of that would perhaps explain this starting?

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/330182

Are you basing this on RTM, or Vista SP1? Because Vista SP1 and Server 2008 are comparable, performance and stability-wise.

No, that was not a feature of W2K, it was XP and up.

First, welcome to THE forum bunnny! As to Vista SP1, I find it incredibly more sprightly in almost every way on my test machine (single-core AMD 3700+ w/2GB RAM and 1x 160GB SATA hdd). I've not had a lot of testing with my main rig (2x AMD Opteron 2300 quad-core w/64GB RAM and 4x 147GB SATAII), but that seems faster in almost every way too, so far (been on the test box for a month, the main rig only 1 week).

Well, a better question is, can you delete the partition with XP setup, create a new partition, REBOOT, and then retry setup formatting the partition? I've seen this happen on some of my own attempts to test this on an older test machine I have - if the partition doesn't exist (empty) when I start setup, the format would fail.

You can do it by following the steps here.

^^^ That would be the recommended configuration, yes, but I never want to tell another admin how to do the job

Hi cluberti, they came up as failed, and again in Dial a Fix jscript and vscript came up as failed again.Any ideas? Thanks for your help so far. Jim Well, a repair install and reinstall of jscript and IE7 would be my first suggestion, although a clean install once you get any virus is my first inclination - you will never be able to know with 100% certainty that the machine is ever truly clean again. I know it is drastic, but fixing the problem the virus caused will take you longer (and again, without the 100% certainty you're actually clean) than it will to back up your data and start fresh.

A video card running the display at a resolution the LCD was built for. Every other resolution results in scaling. It depends on the monitor - for instance, the Dell 3007WFP relies on the video card to do the scaling, whereas the 3008WFP has hardware inside the monitor to scale. If your monitor relies on the video card, expect poor results compared to a monitor with hardware scaling built-in. Again, this is a function of the LCD panel, not the video card. If the LCD can't natively display the vesa resolutions (like 320x200, for instance) that a DOS window or old 16bit app will display, then it can't show these like the laptop you mention.It's all a function of the display (one of the reasons that laptop used to cost more $$$ was the LCD panels used were usually quite good).

Bluetooth printers are not enterprise-class, and just like USB printers shouldn't be used in print servers (I know you can, but you shouldn't). Not really strange. Bluetooth devices are really for business user or home user use, thus the inclusion of a bluetooth stack only in the client. Servers need to be safe, thus, bluetooth is a potential attack vector and is not included, amongst other reasons.

Got the tax check back last weekend, and a nice new Dell 3008FPW showed up this morning (glad I'm sick from work today - this wasn't supposed to be here until Wednesday of next week!). It's far wider than my two 17" monitors that are now flanking the 30", and it's gonna be hard to go back to my 2x20" setup at work . As to the OP, if you run a bigger monitor at it's native resolution, yes, scroll bars should be diminished because windows can be far larger, displaying more on screen at once and thus the need to scroll less. Having a monitor that beats 2x17" without the annoying frames of the monitors in the middle of your dual-mon display is really, really nice too. Buy the biggest LCD you can afford, you won't regret it - if you get a REALLY nice monitor, it should survive a few different PC refreshes too .

I would say try running regsvr32 /u %windir%\system32\jscript.dll and then run regsvr32 /i %windir%\system32\jscript.dll (try it without the /i if you get an error). After that, regardless of whether or not the commands worked, try dial-a-fix again.

The problem I have with this, is that it's forcing a company to open it's secrets to the world without compensation. I know people feel different ways about "secret" APIs, but this is a slippery slope - forcing a closed-source company to open it's API's and source seems dangerous to me (even for the EU).

Well, considering the current generation of Intel "quad-cores" are really dual-die dual-core processors that have to leave the CPU to speak to the other die taking on a massive performance penalty to do so, I don't think I want them emulating that . AMD's quad-core design is a true single-die quad-core, meaning I won't be spending hundreds of milliseconds every time the cores need to sync. And I'm not buying Core2 or Phenom (or any other desktop technology) - and if I'm paying the $$ for a Xeon, I'd like it to be at least a good design. Yes they were the first to release 4 cores in a package, and yes dual-die dual-core allows faster CPUs in the same package (less heat/power per core), but for actual real-world implementation the design is just not that good in my experience, especially as a heavy VM and database server guy. If I'm buying a server and I want a quad-core chip, I buy an AMD because it's an actual quad-core, not a dual-die dual-core that has latency built right into every operation that requires intra-cpu communication. Not to mention the hypertransport issues above.

Ohh, watch out for media autosense with Marvell chipsets on gigabit. I've found that forcing to 100 or 1000Mbits solves a lot of problems. As to the script, here it is (vbscript): Dim sTestPath Dim intCount Set objFSO = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject") Set objShell = CreateObject("WScript.Shell") Set objVolatileEnv = objShell.Environment("VOLATILE") ' An UNC path here that will be available when network connection is in place sTestPath = "\\server\share" intCount = 1 ' test on volatile environment variable to avoid running logon script ' if the user has already run the logon script. If Not objVolatileEnv("LogonScript") = "Done" Then Do Until objFSO.FolderExists(sTestPath) ' sleep 5 seconds WScript.Sleep 5000 intCount = intCount + 1 If intCount = 24 Then MsgBox "Unable to connect to network share for 2 minutes. Please notify your network administrator." Exit Do End If Loop ' share/folder available on server now, so continue End If

That makes sense, as these files are directly responsible for jscript execution. I would go into add/remove programs and remove the windows script host 5.7 (if you can), and then re-download the package and reinstall.

OK, so are you installing the 32bit version of Sharepoint? Assuming so, and you have the 32bit version of .net 2.0 installed, the command *should* work (if all is well and that doesn't work, please repost back). Also, make sure you check out Denis Bauer's ASP.Net version switcher tool too.

Consider investigating ximage and the wim format. These are the file-based native imaging solutions for Vista, and yes, they can be made hardware-agnostic.

Again, the first two .dll files I've explained. The last would indicate that you either had the google toolbar on this machine and removed it, or if it is currently installed, it's broken and should be removed/reinstalled. Explorer.exe isn't IE, it's the shell (desktop, taskbar, etc). Iexplore.exe is the Internet Explorer file, and explorer.exe would only be involved if you double-click an IE icon to open the browser. As to the version, IE7 is built from the Vista tree, and as such (even on XP and 2003) it will display as a Vista version. This is normal. Quite true, but once a machine is infected, you can never be truly sure what it has done. Unless this is a learning exercise for you (i.e. you don't mind the downtime trying to fix this the hard way), I strongly suggest the VERY next thing you do is back up your data to another location and wipe that machine, starting over. Once a machine is infected, unless you wipe it clean and restart, you can never be 100% certain it's clean. Don't assume what you see is a problem - page faults come in two forms, hard faults and soft faults. A hard fault is when something is attempting to access a page in memory, and it is no longer in RAM nor is it's page file page intact, causing a complete reload of the data in the page, thus a hard fault. A soft fault is when something is attempting to access a page in memory, it is no longer in RAM, but it's data is in a page in the paging file, and it is "faulted" back into RAM. Unless you know which is happening (hard or soft), I wouldn't put an overabundance of emphasis on this. It's not entirely normal (and again, this machine is suspect), but I wouldn't necessarily worry about this quite yet. Hard to say, but Windows filesystems (and the binaries that read from them) are not case-sensitive, so if the signature is OK and the checksums match, it doesn't matter. Again, you've said a magic word - "trojan". I reiterate my statement, that unless this is a learning exercise in how to clean an infected system, you would be supremely wise to back up any important data on that machine to a separate location and rebuild from scratch.

Are you sure it isn't the installation media that has a problem?

Sweet - hopefully they'll have a good implementation, and drive competition up and costs down . Too bad it took them 4 years to catch up.

I have to second jroc's statement - Vista SP1 has driver issues with some video, audio, and network drivers. The solution is to uninstall and reinstall the offending driver (preferably with a newer version from the vendor).

Well, it's saying your HKLM\System hive is corrupt or missing. I'd say that if you reinstall Windows on that drive and it keeps occuring, you either have something you keep installing that is corrupting the system hive, or a bad disk. If you really only reinstalled Vista and the problem happened, I'd return the drive as defective. If you're doing the same installs over again after installing Vista, I'd at least be suspicious of some software package.