Spinman

Started a clean install of XP-MCE 2005 last night and discovered that Windows Update will no longer update XP-SP2. As I recall from a prior reinstall - certain aspects of MCE2005 must be updated in SP2 mode - once SP3 is installed, the components will not update. Is this true? Or can I install SP3 and let Windows Update do all the work? I've previously downloaded and have been able to manually install the following (9) updates: KB900325 = MCE Rollup 2 KB912024 = ehome rollup #2 KB913800 = WMP10MCE update KB925776 = MCE2005 - Post2 Rollup KB954086 = MCE2005 Protected Content KB976738 = Post 2 Rollup Security KB2502898 = Post 2 Rollup Security KB2619340 = Post 2 Rollup Security KB2628259 = Post 2 Rollup Security Are there any other MCE specific updates that I need to install before I apply SP3? Thanks!

No modifications that I'm aware of (other than installing Hard Disk Sentenial - that changes the drive icons to a 'vista' scheme) Just rebuilt one of the other machines last night with a fresh OS reinstall. Following the inital boot - I had the same problem on that machine as well - showing all the drives (disk, optical, flash) from the same desktop in the other section. Have never experienced this before...

Have 6 computers networked at home - on one of them, I am showing the drives from another computer in the other section of explorer. Strange that just this 1 computer is showing and only on this box - all other combinations are what I would expect... How can I remove? [image attached for problem clarity] drives.bmp

Greetings - I'm playing around with the evaluation version of Window Home Server (built ontop of Server 2003) and have run across a video issue: Yes, I know that the video card and drivers are not supported in W2k3, but... I'm running an ATI 9200SE (128MB) PCI video card using driver v.6.11 [2006.11.15] - using XP drivers [installed in XP compatability mode]. I have not installed the control center, as I've read that it is not compatable with Server 2003. I've increased the settings for both the primary and the seconday display to full acceleration. When I run only with the SVGA monitor attached - everything works fine. When I run only with the S-Video TV attached - everything works fine. However, when I try to operate with both the monitor and the TV attached - my problems begin. 1) Colors shift slightly - pure whites become pinks on the monitor 2) Sharp details become slightly fuzzy and slightly distorted on the monitor. 3) The output on the TV is reduced from a great full screen image to 6 multiple, repeating images that are distorted and unviewable. Connect both S-Video & SVGA = problem begin Disconnect either SVGA or S-Video = problems end When testing the same configuration on my XP-Pro machine - I don't have any problems - I'm able to view output on both devices simultaneously. So it's not the card - its either the setup or configuration on the WHS box. Is there anything additional I can check / set / change in my configuration? Thanks -

Some additional information - For some reason, after several boot attempt over the course of 1/2 hour - I finally got to the post test. I was able to do a warm boot and recycle through up to the Post test several times. Decided to flash the bios, to ensure I had the latest version - it worked fine (apparently I did have the latest version). I was able to boot the floppy and hard drive (once). Then the same problem returned - no post test. Reviewing the diagnostic tree on the SOYO web site, I ran a variety of tests and analysis. I changed the jumper settting to clear the cmos - when I rebooted, I was able to reach the post test. I'll keep checking for the next day to see if it has stabalized - or if problems return. I think I'll leave it on today and not press my luck - perhaps time for a little burn in test...

Anything I'm overlooking? I decided to build a new box using new spare parts I've accumulated over the years for a "no-cost/low-cost" system. All new, untested retail components. Soyo SY-P4RC350 motherboard with Centron D-345 processor (478 socket/533mhz/3.06g/90n Prescott) Using onboard video, no additional agp or pci cards at this time. I mounted everything, booted normally and installed windows. Was relatively pleased that the system exhibited no problems (no warranty/exchange for defective parts available). During the assembly and windows installation process - the system was on for perhaps 1 hour and rebooted several times (both cold and warm). Once everything was up and running properly, I shut down and removed power cord for the evening. I returned the next day, added a few more hard drives to the system - when I tried to boot - nothing. No bios splash screen. The CPU fan spins, the led's on the board light, the hard disk spins - but no bios boot screen on my monitor. Does not make the sounds associated with booting (running but no video) - too silent. Tired reseating everything (memory, cpu, cables) - no improvement. Tried a different power supply - no improvement. Detached all hard drives - no improvement. Swapped memory chips - no improvement. Removed motherboard from case and tried to run on the bench - no improvement. Cant get to the bios splash screen and continue booting from there. Am I correct in assuming that the motherboard is garbage? Don't have another 478 socket board at this moment to swap out and check... Can't think of anything else to do to check / correct the problems... Thanks -

Sorry I was so verbose - I guess I didn't clearly explain my through process... 1) Invest in a new P4 Prescott to achieve increase in performance over existing system ($70 - $130 out of pocket expenses) vs. expense of acquring new dual-core/Vista technology. Use this machine as my production box. 2) Retire existing P4 2.4g box from main production to home server (or possibily a MCE2005 box). I'm interested seeing if there is any noticeable performance difference between 3.0 and 3.4 prescott - will I notice the processor performance for the $60 expenditure - which I expect would be my main production box for another 2-3 years ($20/year for performance boost). 3) Do nothing and keep existing P4 2.4g system for another 2-3 years until switching to state of the art system. Save $70 - $130 by not buying obsolete prescott ($25 - $45/year). I guess I'm talking myself into the Prescott - just wondering about the heat issues - is the 3.0 cooler than the 3.4? or is that difference immaterial? More speed - more is better, No?

Thinking about building a system from parts in my junk drawer - have everything available except a processor. Hate to invest money in a 478 socket processor - but otherwise, I see no future for the motherboard, PC3200 memory and cpu cooler I have collecting dust. Thought this might be something to stepup from a system with 845g chipset, 2.4g P4 w/ PC2100 memory until I make the leap to dualcore and Vista (which would allow me to dedicate the 2.4g system to use as a home server). Scanning the web, I see current prices for OEM P4 prescott's are as follows: 3.0g = $70 3.4g = $130 Is the 3.4g unit worth the $60 price differential (considering it is depreciated technology) so that I would have the best of the 478 processor family - or would I be better to get the 3.0g unit to minimize my investment in old technology. Or of course the other option is to skip the 478 entirely and build from scratch with current technology - and keep my junk drawer for future component failures. At which point, I would probably wait another year and keep plugging away with my 2.4g system. Just seeks some opinions before I jump....

Trying to boot my laptop from a PCMCIA ATA Flash Card in order to install W98SE onto a new hard drive. (laptop is Itronix XC-6250-PRO, which does not have an internal floppy drive or internal CD drive). The bios supports booting from a PCMCIA Card (either ATA Flash or CF). Using a laptop already running W98SE, I have used FDISK to create a partition [1.2g, the card's capacity] and set the partition as active. Using Windows Explorer, I have formatted the card (FAT32) and installed the system files. (Don't think that I need to use FAT). When I reboot, the bios informs me that it is booting from the PCMCIA card - and after a few moments, receive message "Type the name of the command interpreter (e.g., C:\Windows\Command.com)". I assume that this message is generated by the hidden bootstrap files on the PCMCIA card, and not by the bios itself. So, it appears that the system is recognizing the card, starts to boot from it, but can't / won't load command.com to finish the process. I have tried entering just "command.com" and "X:\command.com" using drive letters a - z, but nothing worked. I have googled the message, and received suggestions about possible MBR or corrupt disk issues. Using FDISK to setup a new partition, I would have thought that would have resolved any possible MBR issues. Running Scandisk on the card completes with no errors identified. After booting from HD, I can insert the card and access it from both windows and dos. The command.com and bootstrap files are still present on the card. So it's not a readability issue, per se. Note: After using the DOS sys command to install the system files on the card, I get a message that the card can't boot due to I/O errors. Note: After using the DOS format command to format the disk and install the system files on the card, I get a message that the card can't boot due to I/O errors. Only when I format and install system files using Windows Explorer, will the machine begin to boot from the PCMCIA card - until I get the type name and location of the command interpreter message. Strange. Hardware incompatability issue? Does Dos format in FAT32 or just FAT? Does DOS format support a 1.2g capacity? In as much as it is W98 DOS v 7 - I assume no issue with Fat32 and 1.2g. Wondering if I purchase a CF card and reader to try this process - would I get the same results - or possibly get me over this hurdle? Do I need a type I or type II CF to emulate the ATA card? Appreciate thoughts -

The box does not have built in lan - have PCMCIA lan card. Therefore, can't install from a network. USB port is not bootable. No CD. No Floppy. In the past, I've removed the drive and installed the OS via Ghost while mounted in a desktop. Guess I'll see if I can trackdown someone with a PCMCIA CF card reader and CF memory card - hand on experimentation.

Not looking to run an OS from the flash card - I have a laptop that does not have an internal cd drive. Do not have the bootable external devices normally used with this configuration. Wanted to boot into w98 emergency startup disk loaded on the CF - and from there install windows from a directory that was previously installed in the card while it was in another system (that does have a cd drive). So my game plan is to use a 1 g CF card that would be bootable and from there start the windows installation onto the hard drive. Once installed - system would boot normally from the hard drive. Just trying to understand if any regular type CF card (type 1 / type 2) is bootable when used with a PCMCIA CF reader - or do I need something special that has "ATA capabilities"?

My laptop is capable of booting from a PCMCIA ATA Flash PC Card (ie: http://www.simpletech.com/commercial/produ...aflashcard.html ) I have also heard that you can boot using a CF memory card - because it mimicks the ATA protocol and is recognized by the BIOS as a drive. Would like to confirm that statement. Can I use any combination of CF memory card and PCMCIA/CF adaptor - or do I need to look for something special to accomplish this? Some of the CF memory cards specifically state that they are ATA compatable, most do not. A few of the PCMCIA/CF adaptors state that they are ATA compatable - most do not. Are the few that mention it, different - or are they just marketing their components differently than the run of the mill CF products to justify a higher price? The general CF memory cards and PCMCIA adapters for digital photography are cheaper than those that state ATA compatable. Just wondering if anyone has any experience....

I know back in the old days - it was important to properly install ATA devices to obtain max data transfer speeds. Wondering if the setup for motherboard RAID drives would run better if I installed the drives in a particular order - or is it inmaterial? I'd rather keep matching drives on the same controller if it won't degrade performance... Gigabyte 8IEXP running hacked full raid with onboard Promise 20276 chip Raid Drive A Controller 1 Channel 1 Raid Drive A Controller 1 Channel 2 Raid Drive B Controller 2 Channel 1 Raid Drive B Controller 2 Channel 2 - or - Raid Drive A Controller 1 Channel 1 Raid Drive B Controller 1 Channel 2 Raid Drive A Controller 2 Channel 1 Raid Drive B Controller 2 Channel 2 Because Raid Drive A will write 2 drives - is it better to send the two signals on the same controller or on different controllers? Is the signal send to the two devices simultaneously or sequentually? If simultaneously - then in my mind, it would make sense to use different controllers. If sequentually - then it should not matter. I searched Promise literature, but never saw the issue addressed - all they say is hook up the drives and then establish the array in the setup utility.

The system itself is nearly 4 years old - no problems to date, with the exception of previously failed hard drives. Hardware is constantly updated. When I do a drive test using a floppy dos test - this is testing each drive individually - because the raid drivers have not loaded. However, I'm assuming that the vendor test program is properly using the raid chip properly. I have relocated my windows folder pointers off of the raid drives and back onto the C:\ drive. Next step is to break the raid configuration and boot with each drive as a stand alone device (if necessary). I was able to place my ear next to the drive cage and isolated the clunking drive to cage #2 - but was unable to determine a particular drive. This evening I removed my PCI ATA/100 card, and the drives attached to it - and have not had any lockup or clunking for the past 3 hours. I'll need to retest the card and drives to ensure they are operating properly. Starting to wonder if I was experiencing a conflict between the Promise 20276 Raid and the Promise Ultra 100 - even thought they have been installed and operational together for several years. Got to love the diagnostic process - swap and replace - until problem is isolated. Gigabyte 8IEXP motherboard running hacked full raid

One of my machines has started displaying problems - wondering if anyone has any out of the box suggestions... Clean system - have run anti-virus and spyware detection tools - results are clean. Just to be sure, recently performed a clean install. System will lockup after about 15 minutes (don't know if it is time related, or work related). Hard drive access light is on steady. Keyboard inoperative. Have to hit the reboot button on the case (or power off / on). Several minutes prior to lockup - one of my hard drives starts to give the clunk / clunk sound of a drive beginning to fail. I have 8 drives in the machine - 4 stand alone drive and 4 assigned to 2 raid-1 arrays. OS is on C:\ (stand alone), while all data files (My Documents, etc) are on the 2 raid arrays. Have run Maxtor and Segate drive analysis from floppy disk during boot - all drives are reported as functioning normally - SMART is normal - no problems detected. If I take this at face value - wondering if this might indicate a power supply (voltage) or motherboard (chip) problem - or if I should refocus back on the hard drives. My next step would seem to be to reassign the data file folder pointers (not the data) back to the C:\ drive so that I can safely disconnect the raid drives. I would then disconnect the 7 other drives (one at a time) and use the system to see if lockup and clunk noise continues. If so, proceed to another drive. If not, reconnect and see if it returns. Replace drive as testing indicates. I guess I'm confused as to why the drive tests report that the drive are OK, but I'm getting the clunking, the lockup and the constant hard drive activity light (when lockup occurs).

Resolved the issue - but don't know what or why... Reformatted the drive - continued to show LBA OFF during BIOS POST Wrote Zeros to the drive - rebooted - showed LBA On during BIOS Post Formatted Drive using WD data lifeguard installation utility Rebooted - showed LBA OFF during Bios Post Wrote Zeros to the Drive - rebooted - showed LBA ON during Bios Post Created Partition and Formatted Drive using XP Drive Manager Utility Rebooted - Showed LBA On during BIOS Post So apparently something in the WD drive installation program is turning off the LBA on the drive (or at least reporting that it is off)

The drive is used for storage - as I recall, nearly full - way past the 137 barrier. I'll confirm tonight when I'm back home. I did not see any settings in the BIOS screens that referenced turning LBA off. Checking the BIOS screens for all 6 drives - everything looks identical to my eye. Might try swapping the 2 SATA data cables and see if the problem remains with the drive or the channel. My other thought is to backup the data, and format the drive again - in case something will self correct. My understanding is that LBA is turned on automatically with SP2 - you don't need to use an answer file during installation to set the paramater active. The fact that the BIOS is reporting LBA off prior to loading the OS - indicates to me that it is either motherboard or drive related.

Running XP-Pro-SP2 on an ASUS K8N motherboard. Have 6 hard drives: Maxtor 160g PATA = IDE Primary - Master Western Digital 200g PATA = IDE Primary - Slave Maxtor 200g PATA = IDE Secondary - Master Maxtor 200g PATA = IDE Secondary - Slave Western Digital 200g SATA = IDE Third - Master Western Digital 330g SATA = IDE Fourth - Master All drives appear to be configured and running properly - reports and utilizes stated drive capacity. System is stable. I just turned on the detailed BIOS display and note that 5 of the 6 drives report that LBA mode is on. One of the drives reports that LBA mode is off (the WD 200g SATA drive/IDE Third Master). Checking the configuration in BIOS - all 6 drives are setup for AUTO detection. Any thoughts as to why this one drive is reporting LBA mode is OFF during boot (and what can be done to correct it)? Would a low level format possibly solve the problem? I'm able to access the drive and have not lost any data - so the 137g limitation does not appear to come into play. Curious -

Just rebuilt a friends system. He is on dial-up - so rather than spend 10 hours downloading the various window updates - I ran the update and wrote down all the KB's that were listed. Downloaded offsite on a broadband connection - and transfered them to his hard disk via a flash drive. Then I manually installed all 30+ updates. Total time = 25 minutes. Was wondering - would it have been possible to transfer the various update files I manually downloaded into a specific directory on his machine that the windows updates web site would check - see that the file already exists - and install it automatically? Are the files that are downloaded via windows update stored somewhere on the system? I'd like to copy them and save them for future rebuild under the above scenario. Just curious - did a disk search, but did not come up with any likely locations... Please NOW in Microsoft Windows XP section, use [TAGS] in your topic's title. See rules. --Sonic

Installed IE7 beta 1 several days ago (XP-sp2). Ever since, outlook express 6 is constantly asking me to enter my username and password for each folder it tries to download. Anyone else experience this? About ready to remove and go back to IE6 unless someone has some thought on how to overcome this issue. Thanks -

I have an elderly relative still using AOL dial-up. Can't change - don't ask... Needless to say, the AOL experience is horrible - the computer constantly locks up. When I use another dial-up ISP and IE - everything works fine. Wondering if anyone knows a way to utilize the AOL dialup phone number but access the web via IE (without installing the AOL software)? If that can be done - I think I can get him use to checking his mail directly on the AOL.com web site. [For example - I know that you can avoid using the MSN software and dial in directly if you put "MSN/" in front of your username ie: MSN/username. ] Is there anything similar with AOL? Did a google search and came up with one site that had a program called AOL direct connect - but am hesitant to try it - couldn't find it listed anywhere else (including AOL). BTW - I emailed AOL - but their technical support had no idea what I wanted to accomplish...DUH. Thanks -

Need some clarification please - Prior to reading this post - I was trying to find a way to play Quicktime MOV files in WMP10 (and eventually in MCE 2005). Via google, I ran across 'Quicktime Alternative v1.64' which was mentioned earlier in this post. I loaded the program and everything was fine - MOV files played in WMP10 and in MCE w/o any apparent problems. However, I've now discovered a problem - after playing a MOV clip in MCE2005 - I am unable to play a VIDEO_TS DVD program immediately afterwards. I get a message "MISSING COMPONENT - A required media center component is missing. Please contact your hardware manufacturer for assistance." If I close MCE and then return to the desktop, and then reopen MCE - the DVD will play. Once I play a MOV clip - I again lose the ability to access content in VIDEO_TS. Note, I do not need to log off or reboot the system - only restart MCE to fix the problem. Have just tried installing the reg patch described earlier in this post - but no change in behavior, and did not notice any differences in behavior (wonder if I need to perform a registry update when installing Quicktime Alternative). Was wondering if anyone has experienced this behavior and / or can offer a suggestion. If not, I'll have to try converting the MOV clips to a more MCE friendly format. Thanks -

Won't know until I try, but wondering if the 1g PCMCIA ATA Flash PCMCIA card might be a work around some problems. The 1g card is too small to hold ghost and my 3.5g image so I would need to do a fresh install, if possible. I would need to install my floppy based drive manager software on the card so that I can boot to the card, do a low level format, load ezdrive bios and establish partition on the hard drive while mounted in the laptop. (wondered about the necessity to install the ezbios to the drive while mounted on the actual machine that has the capacity limitation vs my XP desktop)... I would also need to have my W98SE install disk on the card so that I could load the OS once the drive is setup and recognized. (If at this point I don't show the entire 80 g size or if the bios is locked up - time to bale). 32g keeps staring me in the face as my long term upper limit...

Appreciate everyone input - I've learned a lot the past two days. I was going to start a new thread - but I'll try appending this one with my latest conflicts... As a reminder - this is an ancient laptop from 2000 - I'm running up against the 32g barrier in Bios (no support - upgrades not available - can't find any thing that has already been hacked). FYI - Itronix XC-6250-PRO (300). There is no internal floppy or cd drive - that is why I need to install what I can off line and then reinstall the drive in the laptop for final configurations. My only option at this point would be to search ebay for a PCMCIA bootable floppy that would allow me to do whatever I can via the floppy - but I would still not have access to the usb port and lack a pcmcia cd drive for data transfer / installs... Would prefer not to spend anything $ on obsolete technology... I do have an 1g PCMCIA ATA flash card that I have never tested. The laptop is suppose to be able to boot from that device. (more on this later). With the laptop drive mounted in my desktop - I've established a 30g fat32 partition - did a norton ghost drive copy from my old 6g laptop drive (including the option to transfer the MBR) and then used a drive utility to set the drive size as 32g (ignoring the rest of the 80g drive capacity). When I installed the drive back into the laptop - it booted up, recognized the OS and the 30g partition it resided in. I'm now trying to see if I can somehow bypass the 32g limitation so that I can access the entire 80g's. Based upon my experiments, it looks doubtful. Reading other posts for this particular model - others have commented that they have been unable to use a drive larger than 32g (not knowing what steps they actually took). I have installed Maxtor EZ Bios on the drive. When I boot my desktop with the drive - it reads the bios and then freezes. When I boot the laptop with the drive - it freezes at the POST and does not display the EZ drive message. Same result as when I used the virgin 80g drive. So it appears that the laptop is not processing the EZ drive bios for some reason. (1st reason I'm beginning to believe this is an impossible project). I'm wondering why the drive will not load the OS when mounted in my desktop - after it reads the EZ drive bios. During this setup - I used Norton ghost to restore an existing backup to the partition (not the drive copy I used in the working 32g setup). As I recall, there was no option for me to select to install or not install the MBR that I received when I did the drive to drive copy. When I restore a ghost backup - does it install the mbr and make the drive bootable - or just the partition info? (It does ask me if I want to make the partition active). If that is the case - I'll need to keep the exising 6g drive as backup - or figure some other way to generate a mbr - otherwise the ghost image is useless to me as an emergency recovery device.... When I get home tonight - I'll try doing a drive copy with the mbr option on the drive with the ezbios installed and see what that will do. Wondering if the mbr will over-write the ezbios and render if null and void. If that works - it should be able to boot my desktop - but I'll still have the problem with the laptop not processing the ezbios, for whatever reason.

Thanks - I've given up on the DOS aspect for the time being. I'll trying something else down the road. Just interested in dual boot with W98 and W2K at this time. Created 2 new partitions on my hard drive - 30g fat32 and 50g ntfs Loaded the ghost image of the W98SE (including MBR) into the 30g partition - set as active. Put the drive in my laptop - it froze at the POST, indicating the 32g barrier limitation in bios. Pulled the drive and installed a dynamic drive overlay offline. Reinstalled the drive in the laptop and it booted to W98 - showed the 30g partition. It did not show any entry for the NTFS partition. Even though W98 can't read NTFS - should it not show the partition - or is even that impossible? If I'm going to dual boot between w98 and W2k - does that mean that the W2k system needs to also use FAT32? Or just during the installation (in as much as I have the cd image in the W98 partition for setup). Once installed, and using the MS boot manager, I could convert the drive if I so desired... Is there a MS drive manager utility in W98 as there is in XP - that I could use to reformat the ntfs partition to FAT32 - or will I need to pull the drive? I also understand the W98 has a limitation of 30g for partition size - so I would need to set up at least 3 partitions to obtain the entire capacity of the 80g drive. True? I assume that the dynamic drive overlay will support multiple partitions on the drive - and not just the 1st 30g partition... Thanks again...