Tripredacus

I have a feeling that there are already versions (or builds) that have been lost due to MS using a "live system" of updates. And while there may well be computers with those builds that never got updated, the installation media may not have been preserved. This is even more the case since MS doesn't mail pressed discs to Partners anymore, not even in the Embedded/IoT Channel. The last pressed disc I got from Microsoft was the IoT Enterprise 2015 LTSB kit. Everything after that has been download only, and since the files online can and do get changed by MS, I am certain some things have been "lost."

I do not have a data cap on my service, no. It is cable and and I do not believe any cable companies have data caps on residential accounts, or at least they didn't when I was in that industry.

You can change the default web browser that the OS uses, but may have to deal with other browsers always asking to be default. This will not help if the program you are using is not making a generic request to the OS, aka it is hard coded to launch a particular web browser.

Do not multipost. Keep to this topic instead: https://msfn.org/board/topic/70814-end-user-licence-eula-missing/

100/20 (avg 94/18) $45 (promo rate, will go to $70 in a year)

Edited above posts to remove the name of the OS that was mentioned. It is advertisement of a particular warez release that is at issue. We do not really care what you use on your computers, but the topics cannot be discussed here. In addition, that user had put an illegal avatar on their account. Now, no more discussion of this in this topic. If you want to follow up, you can PM a mod or post in the Site & Forum issues.

Alternatively, you could use something that can edit PDFs, such as Gimp. I do not know if the versions of Gimp that work with XP can edit PDFs.

Today I learned one of the dumbest design decisions I have ever seen in a commercial product. If for whatever reason you account becomes disconnected in MS Teams, you cannot minimize the Teams window unless you log in. Fortunately, you can close the window without logging in.

First batch to run through of testing out drives from my stock pile. After all the years of adding used disks to my collection, this is the first time running through them. Good disks: (PO/POH) - WD Caviar WD102 10.2 GB - Maxtor 90320D2 3.2 GB (182/35763?) loud access - Maxtor 91531U3 15 GB (6884/1665?) loud access Warning disks: (PO/POH) - Quantum Fireball Plus AS 20.5 GB (1764/30947?) Reallocated Sector Count 100 Bad disks: - Quantum Fireball CR 6.4 AT 6.4 GB (not detected in Windows) - Seagate ST32122A 2.111 GB (locks up during post) - WD Caviar WD200 20 GB (not detected in BIOS) - WD Caviar WD200 20 GB (clicks) - WD Caviar 307AA 30.7 GB (clicks) I'll update this post as I test more disks. So far only 3 disks I got that are good are too small. Not sure about that Allocated Sector Count disk... I've run disks that have that and I believe someone once told me that it was safe to ignore but do a backup-type thing. Also interesting in that batch is the Maxtor 91531U3 which has more power on times than power on hours. The question mark on the POH is just because it show up that way. It might be because I'm running my disk testing on Windows XP Home and perhaps the Crystal Disk Info doesn't work properly on that version. IDK. But I will have more disk to test out so I can hopefully find a good 20 or 30 GB IDE drive to use. And too bad about that WD 307AA, 30.7 GB seems to be the perfect size for FAT32.

This forum is based in Europe, sometimes routing through Germany. As such images of WWII-based German military uniforms are not allowed to be displayed. Hope someone can use that info you found about Chrome.

It is a limitation of FAT32 within Windows, so you are right on that and I didn't think to remember it. Especially since I had to figure that out in order to deploy DOS images via WDS. I shouldn't have a problem of finding another 20 GB disk to clone to, but my stash of disks is untested. So that project of a) finding a valid disk and b) archiving relevant data may take some time to accomplish. I would end up using Ghost to copy the disk.

Super bump. Shiva has not been used since this last post, and has been sitting in a corner collecting dust in a gaudy chassis that has no side panel. I have put together a new system that I was going to use for a specific purpose (as with everything) and then I had thought that the purpose is parallel to Shiva. Now when I'm talking about Shiva, I'm talking specifically about the HDD with the OS on it, not particularly the hardware. I am going to clone the disk to another, to boot it in the new computer, to see if a transition is possible. If it is, it would be the 4th board the OS has been on. The first question is what the maximum disk size is that I can clone and extend to that will work with Windows 98 FE? Shiva currently lives on a 20 GB IDE disk, and the disk in the new system is 250 GB, which I presume is too large.

Office 2016 can be either x86 or x64, it depends on which way it is installed.

Can't let a good trademark go to waste.

While there has been some inroads recently, MS builds products for (and licenses them appropriately) for a world where only supported Microsoft products exist. They had previously planned to release a feature into WDS for Server 2012 that could do whole disk imaging but to my knowledge it was not released then. I remember being at a presentation where it was talked about and I asked the presenter if it could be used to image Linux disks on WDS. He said he did not know but it was not supported.

Is it the old Edge or the Chromium Edge?

Or you post an image hosted on a site with a bad cert.

You'll need to look into that log file. It could be anything. Sometimes it is just a file that can't be found.

I made a guess about how big the sizes were. Considering it is unknown to me how much data was on the disks already, but using the general number of around 12 GB as a size of images made from un-optimized installs, and the fact that the disks were 1 TB. The results of the test in the first link are foreign to me. I have never seen DISM take a half an hour to capture a partition. In fact, the 5 minutes shown as being the FFU capture speed is typically the speed I see using DISM regularly. Of course my setup is entirely different, since I use real hardware. For image application, 3 minutes (using that site's example again) is not that great of an efficiency boost in imaging speed when real people are involved. BUT good to know that it is not supported for use in manufacturing.

This topic was moved into funny farm and was originally about something else. I don't remember what it was about. But that is not important anymore. Now this thread is about:

You say that you wake the computer. Are you waking the computer (is it in sleep?) or do you have your monitor set to sleep and not the computer? Are you using the option to lock the system with screen saver, setting a screen timeout or manually locking with Windows+L? If you are using the auto-lock option, does the same thing occur when you manually lock the OS? If that is the case, I would probably set up a ProcMon or PerfMon session, then lock the system, to help identify what processes are active at the time of the disk activity.

Being able to check from within the OS itself is trivial. As in the op, the disks were not allowed to be booted. Now the documentation for DISM FFU does show what is and isn't allowed: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/manufacture/desktop/deploy-windows-using-full-flash-update--ffu In typical fashion, we cannot be entirely certain if the line of "Captures of disks that have Volume Shadow Copy Service (VSS) enabled are not supported" means: - vss is enabled and a capture is present or - vss is enabled but a capture hasn't occurred yet. The worst part is that while DISM will fail a capture for verify specific reasons (not generalized, or vss is enabled) the log file do not make sense. It will just show some strange message that you have to figure out what is causing it. As an example, this is the errors that DISM will throw if the OS is not generalized COfflineHiveT<class CEmptyType>::Init#63 failed with 0x0. CWindowsOSHelper::GetOSInformation#197 failed with 0x800703f1 CDiskReaderT<class CEmptyType>::GetOSInformation#280 failed with 0x800703f1. CManifest:Initialize#836 failed with 0x800703f1. CManifest::CreateInstance#536 failed with 0x800703f1. FfuCaptureInternal#420 failed with 0x800703f1. FfuCaptureImage#116 failed with 0x800703f1. I did not save the log file for my test capture which was a disk that had an OS that had VSS enabled and was not generalized, but the errors were different. There seems to be a load order regarding what DISM looks at for compatibility, as the log had different errors entirely with nothing in common with this one. I also am not sure about this statement: "Deploy Windows faster on the factory floor by using the Full Flash Update" since I can't imagine how it would be faster to push an image tens or hundreds of gigs in size vs an image that is ~8 GB.

Put those files into a container first. Also you may want to see if the limitation is with the destination file system or not. Explorer can be a limiting factor as it does not support all 255 characters in ASCII, but command.com does. Other programs may also not care about symbols in filenames. To see what kind of symbols you can use, on a modern OS you can use Character Map. Say select Arial and then change the character set to DOS: United States. It will show all 255 characters you can use to create paths (or possibly) filenames with on Win9x, including "No-Break Space."

We don't need more than one "Windows 10 is terrible" threads.

DISM FFU (sector based) does not work if VSS is enabled, among other things. In the end, it was one of those other things that determined I could not use it... the fact that the OS on the disk was not generalized.