Tripredacus

From what I have gathered, currently there is no PoC for this. It is basically saying that at some point in the future, you'll need this to do certain things. One of which, I am presuming, is use Windows Update. The thing about being able to connect to wireless networks is valid enough I suppose. Currently it seems Windows 7 is in an in-between-land regarding those (at least in my experience) so I may mitigate that issue entirely by not using Windows 7 on wireless computers.

Windows Update does a process similar to the old in-place upgrade for Feature updates. So things you have removed may not be retained, because they are present in the OS that is downloaded from Windows Update.

This thread is just for XP we have seen "out in the wild" or on the internet, not our own personal systems. We have a thread for that kind of thing here: Which I will be posting in soon once I get my notebooks sorted out.

Ok then, create a new topic and post your XML and we can take a look. But one thing to remember, you can have either XML to create partitions on UEFI/GPT or Legacy/MBR. If your XML is written to create Legacy partitions, but your boot your install media in UEFI mode, Setup either will show the formatting prompt (as shown above) or give an error. Vice Versa has similar issues. So always make sure you are booting correctly, and for this I recommend using the one-time boot menu for your system.

Just making sure you aren't being generic, but IIRC you need Windows 8.1 Update 1 to go to Windows 10.

I have redone my notebook to have a dual boot with Windows 10 and Linux, and now before I attempt to update Win10, I want to make sure I can restore the multiboot ability should Windows Update decide to rewrite things. Windows 10 is an LTSB edition, so it should never get a feature update. Currently the system boots to the Linux boot menu, from there I can choose the OS and I'd rather like to keep it that way. The disk type is MBR. There are 3 partitions: 1: Boot, 2: OS (first two windows) and 3: Linux. It is an SSD if that matters. What are some ways I can easily back up and restore the boot information/menu should Windows decide to take back control of that? Preferrably something that can be run in a WinPE.

Using the exact same XML and using an un-named virtual machine?

The common rule of thumb is to keep a coax cable at least 6 inches from an AC power source, including power cables up until DC transformers. I do not know what the range is per AC motor (what would be the culprit in the air conditioning unit example) as it will vary by device. In situations where you cannot keep a coax cable away from an interference source, that is where you would install shielding. Shielding should be easily DIY if you didn't want to buy specific items.

It has occurred to me that the reason why a developer would go the route of stopping their program from launching on XP (rather than saying, it might not work properly from version x going forward) is that the companies are taking this step for data integrity. In other words, allowing people to run on an unsupported OS would mean that an exploit could be used in that scenario that they would not be able to mitigate. Shutting the door is the only way they can think of.

I used to run a Quake 3 dedicated server on Windows 98.

On my Win7 x64 PC, f I have the option, I install everything to my 1 TB disk. The issues here are: 1. AppData is still going to end up on C: including temporary files. 2. Data is still stored in the user profile which is on C: In a general sense, this isn't a bad situation, as the majority of the data is going to be on the larger disk.

Probably some loose connection somewhere. I have a similar issue occasionally with my DECA network.

If Bluetoothview is like Nirsoft's USBdeview, it may allow you to delete disconnected devices right from that.

The desired name already exists.

What motherboard is it?

I think I've been to East Texas. Does Houston count?

It seems to not be a file size limit relating to DOS, but a size limit set by the application itself. I have given up trying to determine how to increase it. Instead I have been figuring out how the data is stored and I have been making some progress in that. The data is stored in fixed sized regions, so replacing the "deleted" data may end up being easier than trying to figure out how to make the flat file database larger. I may end up posting a topic into the programming section later about it.

I've run into what is either a file size or address limit with a game that I often use. I had run into this issue many years ago with the same program using actual DOS, but I had figured it was caused by some other limit. I had been running the program again, under that impression, and did not run into the issue again until now. The program allows for entering new data into it, and it gets saved into a file. The size of the original file, and the modified file is the same. DOS reports that size as 50,991. The program allows for the removal of data, however I have found that it doesn't remove it from the file, rather it marks it as deleted. So there is a finite amount of additions that can be made, and previous data cannot be removed easily. There is no EOF marker that I can determine. I have tried to increase the size of the null portion at the end of the file, but the program just will overwrite the last section anytime new data is input. There appears to be some ID value that is stored, because when the data is overwritten, ghost entries appear in the data viewer. I tried to search for what the possible limitation could be caused by, but not able to find anything helpful. Making a larger data file does not effect the program's operation, so it does not appear to be a filesize limitation. Here are the details. Main application was compiled with IBM BASIC 2.0. It uses BASRUN20.exe for runtime but no library is present. No source is available. Program currently running in DOSBox with default config. DOSBox has upper memory set at 63Kb as seen in MEM command. Data range start of last entry in data file is c6e9 / 50921. Maximum position of the original file, as seen in a hex editor is c72e / 50990. Is there some address limit that matches up with this behaviour? If it is related to the upper memory size, how can I increase this?

A program that I wrote for Windows 7, that works in 8.1 and all versions of Windows 10 up to 1809, does not work in 1903. The one thing that is changed is running a .cmd file, and I am supposing what the "context" of where the file is run. This seems to be correct, but others can test if they want. In Windows 7 through Windows 10 1809, executing a CMD would run relative to the CMD or call origin to the cmd.exe. Example. On the desktop is a .exe and a folder. Inside of the folder there is a .cmd file. From the compiled .exe, execute a call such as: "cmd /c c:\users\Administrator\desktop\folder\batch.cmd" and inside of that .cmd is "cd folder." This would have to be done because the source .exe is sitting on the desktop, and you would have to CD into the folder to get to those files. A person writing batch would do this for situations where abolute paths do not work (because programs inside required relative paths, or other situations). In Windows 10 1903, the .cmd is run relative to the default CMD path? Example: same as above, but it will fail. Running manually from default CMD context (Win+R cmd.exe) which will default the path to C:\users\Administrator. Running the absolute path to the .cmd will result in the error of unable to find the folder you CD to. It is because now a direct call using CMD will be running in the context of C:\Users\Administrator, rather than C:\Users\Administrator\Desktop, where the initiator (EXE) resides or whatever the start path in the CMD is at the time of manual testing. If the location in CMD is C:\Users\Administrator, then the .cmd file needs to have CD Desktop\folder and it will work. Some small change but it delayed rollout of 1903 for some systems, because batch pathing behavior apparently changed. I hope I explained it properly. I can do a step-by-step breakdown tomorrow if someone doesn't figure out what I'm saying.

Welcome to the MSFN!

I have found it. The Tetris that was in the Entertainment Pack and the Best of Pack is not the original Tetris. It is a port of Mirrorsoft's DOS version, which was the first official release of the game on PC, the first overall being on micros. The info refers to it as Tetris 2.00. and is official insofar that Mirrorsoft sub-licensed the rights to Microsoft, who then put their copyright on it as you can see here: https://harddrop.com/wiki/File:Windtetrisstart.png

Well I don't have that disk, and the Wikipedia page doesn't help. In fact, it cites itself which I'm pretty sure is not how that's supposed to work. In any case, there are no details as to what Tetris that is, either.

I don't think so because you can't open the Emoji Panel from the lock screen. It seems like the Windows key gets disabled there.

It is also not the newest official Tetris for Windows either.