Tripredacus

By pinging "THERMALTAKE" or the IP address?

It depends on the board you are using and it may depend on the hard disk model. If you can post those we can look them up. But generally with modern hardware, you just need to install Windows onto the disk in EFI mode and then you would have the full disk as your C: drive.

I will be first to blame the video card on that computer. It does not support Aero in Win7, so if the new browser is using some different rendering option then it would be my first guess.

SMF is a fine forum for a site just starting out. It is too-bareboned on its own and it is kind of a pain to deal with on the admin/mod side.

Its funny, I went into a co-workers office one day he has Windows 10 on his workstation with multiple monitors. He had calculator opened on one of them and it was comically large! It took like 3/4 of the screen! Even on the MS Store page, you can see how large it is in the example screenshots. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/windows-calculator/9wzdncrfhvn5 Now imagine how it looks, by default, on a 22" monitor!

The first step you need to do is identify the Hardware IDs of both the USB and the storage controller. Then find the drivers for each and add them to your install source and to your OS image. You can find the HwID by booting a WinPE and use Nirsoft's Devmanview: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/device_manager_view.html Or in DOS there are programs such as pciscan.exe.... BUT i am having difficulty finding where this tool comes from. Anyways, it is always easier to know exactly what you are looking for rather than blindly trying drivers. It is real simple, you find the hardware ID, then you can open the INF of a driver and see if the hardware ID is in there or not. If it is, then you can try it. If it isn't, don't bother!

I am seeing screen tearing when scrolling on pages, such as if I am fast enough in scrolling the page isn't rendered and the lower part of my browser window will be all black. I cannot get a screenshot of this behaviour. PS: I see the Noscript icon appears all by itself and so I guess all is well (so far) with this browser.

Yes you just have to change your browser's user agent. It doesn't always work tho, because some websites will then use tricks or methods specifically for that other type of device, and any such tricks obviously won't work on the wrong browser. It is worth a shot tho!

This post is not sponsored by RaRlab's WinRaR archiving software.

Well, WSIM is the program to create XML files. I rarely ever use it, but if you are new to making these types of files, it is the way to go. The only function of WSIM I find particularly useful is the ability to check syntax vs an image. There are some instances where an XML will work fine on the stock DVD, but not work on a custom image. So I wouldn't put WSIM down as a deployment tool in the same way as ICD. ICD is an evolution of the EDT (Express Deployment Tool) and is like an entry level version of MDT. MDT seems to be the good thing to use, but even it and ICD have the same issues to me. They are designed specifically for use in the Enterprise Channel and are not very useful if you are in the OEM Channel due to imaging requirements being different.

I think part of it may have been that I normally block most parts of websites and currently I am not able to do so. Noscript is not yet released for Quantum. Perhaps it not seems slower because it is now actually downloading all those videos and other crap that people put on their websites.

Is Malwarebytes one of those programs that enforces a minimum version for definition updates? Or could you just update the defitions and not the program itself? I've never had a problem with that program even going back years.

I'm seeing an opposite speed improvement. Websites seem slower than in the previous version. Also noticed instances where some tabs are unloaded (I have not been looking at memory usage) so when I switch between tabs, sometimes the tab is blank and the page gets reloaded.

This whole thing with the processors we can think perhaps started with even earlier OSes like NT where they have 1 cpu and 2 cpu versions... But this model is more closely following a different trend. Whereas in NT the their different editions were actual different software, in this it is not different software. It is only "licensing" differences. They have been doing this for some time with the Embedded (IoT) products. In that there are 3 different branches, similar to that of Enterprise with LTSB, CBB and CB, where LTSB and CBB are the same software but CB is different. And then on top of that, for each they have 3 additional licenses that are based on processor. A low end for Atoms and Celerons, a mid range for i3-i5 and a high end for i7-i9 (and their AMD equivalents)... Yet even with all those licensing options, there is only 2 different software packages per "build", 2015 or 2016 which cross to say 1511 and 1607 on the desktop side. So I think they were piloting this licensing model in the Embedded channel for some time and now this is the first instance of it showing up in the Retail channel. But, as far as I can tell at this time, the software itself doesn't care about the CPU... Because the point right now is all of these different options can only be purchased through an OEM or Embedded Partner, and are not available to end users or enterprise clients. So for now, it is quite transparent to end users but I wonder if some day MS is going to actually enforce locking the license to specific CPUs. We know they have already tested that type of technology with Windows 10 not being able to update on older CPUs.

I got the push for Firefox Quantum today and already I don't like it. - It still supports themes (as per the settings gizmo) but any old themes look like crap. When I try to get some new themes (there is a link in the settings panel) the page loads up and is all blank. - Bookmark folders are no longer displayed in the main menu. I had all my bookmarks organized into folders, and if you look into the Bookmark section (Library is now the main area) it only shows the recent bookmarks. The only way to view your folders is to make a few extra clicks to show the Bookmarks Sidebar. - All of my add-ons are gone except Web Developer. It would be really nice that an automatic upgrade would come up and check your add-ons, and if any were not compatible, then ask the user if they want to upgrade. Because there are some situations where a person may not want to use the new version without some things. I can live without my translation add-on, but the loss of the security add-ons are the equivalent of deciding to uninstall my antivirus. It may end up being that I will kick Firefox to the curb and move into Pale Moon (I have that on other computers) if this keeps up. I'm already having to use Chrome more often as I encounter websites that do not work correctly on Firefox and even some MS websites not working with IE anymore. If you are on the new Firefox Quantum and find any tricks or know how to get the bookmarks to be back, post them here. Or if you have anything you like about the new version.

Yes of course! But there is some bonus, from the pricing info I've seen, the price of the lower end version is cheaper than "Desktop Pro" if you have 4 cores or less... Or is it 3 cores or less. It is written in a way where 4 cores is not accounted for, only as <4 and >4 with no use of the ≥ or ≤ characters. There is also the ability to use this with 4 physical CPUs, so that's a thing.

My browser console says this about it. Only Google can fix this. One of the downsides of using scripts hosted by other websites. I must note that my browser from yesterday is not today, Firefox Quantum which I don't like already!

I see that message is directly relating to Google Analytics. What browser are you using and what is your User Agent?

It is an additional product to try to get end users to be buying the correct edition. Microsoft likes to be able to control how computers are purchased, or their configurations. In the market there are go-between systems called workstations. Not to be funny! ODMs make Desktop, Workstation and Server boards. Usually these Workstation boards get tested and supported for the Desktop OS and the Server OS, at least for storage and network drivers. But there was no Windows Edition aimed at these products. I think that this is what that is meant for. Microsoft also would like to stop people from purchasing mis-matched configuration, which is common. Desktop boards (and sometimes even notebooks) with Server OS, or a Server board with a desktop OS. This OS is being sold with the idea that it will be installed onto system with a Xeon or Opteron CPU. I don't know about any other channels, everything I read says that it is available as a pre-installed OS with new computer purchase from an OEM. There appears to be a method to get Windows 10 Pro for Workstations through Windows Update, but I am unsure of how you can tell if your PC is elligible for such a thing. Besides having the required CPU, there is also a mention of possibly getting it from the Microsoft Store (the one in Windows, not the brick and mortar, wtg MS having 2 different things with the same name)... there seems to be very specific situations where this would work. I'd have to say the details of this are not for the public, so you'll have to wait and see if MS or some other website publishes this info. It really looks like this could only work on a PC purchased from an OEM (royalty, not System Builder) fairly recently, so that the PC shipped with 1709 installed and has a Xeon or Opteron CPU.

There are only 2 main changes in the INF for ati2mtag_Tonga, which is the ID tag that the HardwareID you posted belongs to. Using this reference: C7318501.inf (22.19.677.257) coinst_17.30.dll HKR,, DALNonStandardModesBCD1, %REG_BINARY%,08,00,04,80,00,00,00,60,10,24,06,00,00,00,00,60,12,80,07,68,00,00,00,60,14,00,10,50,00,00,00,60,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,60,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,75,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,85,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,60 HKR,, DALNonStandardModesBCD2, %REG_BINARY%,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,75,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,85 C7305077.inf (16.300.2311.0000) coinst_16.30.dll HKR,, DALNonStandardModesBCD1, %REG_BINARY%,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,60,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,75,13,60,07,68,00,00,00,85,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,60,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,75,13,66,07,68,00,00,00,85,08,00,04,80,00,00,00,60,10,24,06,00,00,00,00,60 HKR,, DALNonStandardModesBCD2, %REG_BINARY%,12,80,07,68,00,00,00,60,14,00,10,50,00,00,00,60 The other difference between the two INF is that each use a different CoInstaller file, which I put above. You can find where the INF installs these files in the [Coinstaller_Copyfiles] section. I read that these registry settings contain resolution and refresh rate and whatever else, but I do not know how to decode them. I suppose you could try to change those 3 lines (from the old to new) that are different and see... but any changing of the INF will break the digital signature and may be a worse headache.

Do you know of a known working version number? You say that in 2017 they stopped working but before they did. What is a known working one?

2008WindowsVista is now WinClient5270.

The direct link to the driver does not work. What video card do you have, so I can pick it from the menu?

The update looks to only have changed win32k.sys. DirectX is causing this crash which may mean that Microsoft only "fixed" this issue by preventing any payload from being executed, rather than preventing the overrun in the first place. I have found that your dxgkrnl.sys should be version 6.2.9200.21831 (For Server 2012) or newer. There is no detection details or information relating specifically to Windows 8.0. See what yours is. Perhaps another update is still needed. But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that there is something blocking and it is caused by AMD. They wouldn't go through the trouble of creating a driver/installer that crashes the OS when they could just read from the registry to determine what the OS is and present a messagebox instead. Instead, what I suspect is the issue is that these drivers are created using a newer method that is available in the other OSes but not 8.0 because 8.0 was not updated to support it. Or that the AMD driver would install a pre-requisite (say if you were to install this on a newly installed/unpatched Windows 7) if it found some piece was needed, but is not executed because your OS (Windows 8.0) is not seen as being supported. Or perhaps it is, but the files it tried to install do not actually install because of the version difference and then not show an error. I need to ask, IDK if I did before. When exactly do you get this message? Is it during installation, after installation before reboot, or on reboot? If this driver is something you downloaded from online, provide a link to it (on an AMD or ODM website) so that I can see what it looks like. Also see if there is any log files that the AMD installer made on your system.