Tripredacus

I still prefer XPS over PDF but that is likely more to do with the software itself and not the file format.

Lack of error logging (actual regressions) is one thing I do not like about Windows 10. One example is the change in OOBE made it so half of that phase is not logged into the setupact.log in Panther or UnattendGC anymore, making it impossible to troubleshoot some first-time boot scenarios.

Sure any code that is hidden can be a problem... and PHP is used to target servers for sure. But PHP is not a big threat to clients, because it only runs on the server and does not interact with a browser at all.

After installing the Flash update on Monday, now in Firefox it is set to prompt instead of enabled, which was my old setting. I only had Flash configured to deny/prompt for local storage. So it seems that that update change a setting in my browser without asking or notification. Also the prompt has changed, it says now Flash will slow down my computer.

Flash was too innocent when it came into being, or after its separation from Shockwave. Macromedia had put in the ability to not only have local file access but their own scripting language. Once this happened, Flash became a problem. Macromedia did remove the local file access in SWF but not Projector. Then they removed it from Projector in the MX 2004 version. (Projector was the ability to compile an .exe from your Flash movie. I would put it on the same terms as what an HTA is to HTML/ASP.) Then later they removed Projector. They never did remove ActionScript, and this was the main issue with Flash. Since the SWF was compiled, it hid what script it had inside of it. The SWF could be decompiled but not on the fly in a browser or at runtime. People even figured out how to code it so the SWF couldn't be decompiled properly. It became pretty much void that Adobe could not remove the ActionScript from Flash and only would continue to patch it to fix exploits or other bugs. The writing was on the wall and it was already a dead product for many years now. The problem was that it was the best at certain things up until just recently. While there had been many ways to provide fancy graphics or do video playback, there was nothing better than it functionality wise. Things are a lot different now that HTML5 is defacto staying around and is proven enough to take over that responsibility from Flash. So now Flash can go away. I do not know how the Wii or iPod works, but Flash won't stop immediately. Anything that runs on projector or local files would still work. SWF that is linked to embedded SWF would still work, providing the files are still on the server. Same for anything else it links into, such as images, XML/flatfiles or a database. I'm sure that there will still be extensions for browsers that allow Flash content to work, it is just that Flash will no longer be maintained. Big websites that keep up with trends won't use it anymore, but if your browser still supports it and you go to a site that has it, it will still work.

That is the wrong term. Planned Obsolescence is when a product is created with the plan baked in from the get-go that it will become unusable at some point. So this can't really be applicable to Adobe since it was not them who even made Flash in the first place.

Only until the next one comes out. Also why would Asus decide to name their new phone for 2017, "ZenFone 4" which was also a name of one of their phones from 2014?

Fortunately, Canon still has a website: https://www.canon-europe.com/support/consumer_products/products/fax__multifunctionals/inkjet/pixma_mp_series/pixma_mp230.aspx?type=drivers&language=EN&os=WINDOWS 7 (32-bit)

I should have four-five notebooks but I can only find two at the moment. Compaq LTE 5150 Compaq Armada 1592DMT I know I have a more "modern" Armada somewhere. I did used to have an Elite LTE 440/CX (my notebook from college) but it went underwater. I am not 100% certain, but the HDD from the LTE 440 might be in the LTE 5150. Alas that 440 went into the trash. I also believe a Toshiba Tecra was lost to the same fate. The only one I had kept that went underwater was a GRiD 1520. I've been meaning to do a proper PC part inventory and I hope to find those other systems then.

Need to know what the STOP code is, not speculation about what it is. You should still be able to disable the automatic restart on system failure, even on an install, using F8 menu. This will make it so the error remains on the screen until you manually shutdown or reboot the system.

@Roffen took the text from your (edited) duplicate topic and put into your post on this topic. Deleted the duplicate topic.

I was at a gas station on Saturday and saw that the ATM screen was showing that Windows XP was shutting down.

I still have some feeling that the ability to get music from Youtube isn't as "legal" as these websites indicate.

Welcome to the MSFN!

Yes I had moved the INFs to different folders because it specifically says to use one vs the other depending on the controller. So I moved the H to a different folder so Windows could only pick the INF I wanted. So since this is a "VIA SATA RAID" controller, I didn't want Windows to try to use the uata_xph.inf so I took it out of the folder. direct link: http://i.imgur.com/IQoS5Wkl.jpg FWIW, I did also try to use the xph driver on there, but it added about 6 flagged devices and all of them had the "not enough free resources" message in device properties.

Ok for this one, I followed the instruction to update the VIA SATA RAID controller device in Device manager and browsed to the folder that only has uataxp.inf in it. It did not change the VIA device but instead put a flagged device into Other devices. I then installed the driver for that, and now under System there is a UATA Virtual Communication Device. That driver is in the root of the Release folder of the driver download. The instructions do not mention having to install this device. This particular computer does have the IDE controller also, but the only thing connected to it is a DVD drive. Now having rebooted with this UATA driver installed, it doesn't seem to make any difference. It still shows the inaccessible drive (now E) in My Computer, and the same "healthy" extent sized volume in Disk Management.

I am now to another board now. I had also tired to use an ECS board but I couldn't activate XP. So now I am on an MSI PM8PM-V. It has the same issue in IDE mode with the Microsoft driver, the VIA IDE driver and the VIA RAID driver, as downloaded from MSI's website. For RAID, I have it just in JBOD, but the VIA Tool program opens and shows this information about the disk: I will try that UNIATA thing out. Regarding the XP OS, I can easily reimage it without an issue.

Same result with Intel D2700MUD.

Ok there are some other old systems here currently I can test XP on.

Shutdown and unplugged the XP disk. Was able to boot into the Win7 and the partitions are all the same as before. Back in XP, Changing to the Microsoft driver instead of Intel for the PCI IDE controller doesn't change how the disk is seen. There is no newer storage driver for this board, I installed the latest chipset and it says everything was up to date. This board is a SFF board, it doesn't support RAID, so there is no IRST for it. I can try to install an old version to see if it matters. It does seem right now that this XP install doesn't see the disk properly because of drivers. PS: for reference. This PC has 2 disks in it. A 160GB with XP on it, and the 3TB with Win7 32bit on it. The 3TB was not used as a secondary disk in a different Win7 system. Win7 32bit is installed on to the 1.8GB partition. Still want me to try that TinyHexer from within XP? For older OSes like 2000 or NT4, I do not think I have any hardware that support that OS and also have SATA ports.

You can't rebuild that array now because you have changed the data on one of the disks. Usually in the case of a failed mirror, I would ghost (sector copy) one of the drives to a blank disk of the same size. Then erase both of the original HDDs, and recreate the mirror. Then ghost the backup drive to the raid array. But you say "the recovery utility" which makes me thing you didn't do a repair of the existing installation. Usually the case for IRST is that you can't create the mirror after the fact, say using 1 blank disk, because that is a feature not in "cheap" desktop boards, but more a feature in more expensive controllers. Some do apparently have the ability to do it, but typically the IRST will erase your FAT when it makes the mirror. You could use the outlined step from last paragraph to get your OS onto the RAID, but you would need the storage driver in your OS. You can experiment on getting that to work by changing the SATA mode in the BIOS to RAID and then boot your single disk. If it can boot, then the image should work on an actual array. I can't say about your Office key. A pre-install Office doesn't have a product key only in the software. The only reason it would be there is if you put it there. It should be on a COA on the machine, or on your original disk packaging that came with the computer.

I have Win 98FE with 768MB RAM and a 256MB video card. The OS is modified but I do not believe it has a RAM patch installed.

Last bits from Win7 testing. How Explorer sees the partition: Diskpart info: Chkdsk results: Fragmenting worked, Windows defrag analyze and defragmenter worked without errors. Also no errors, warning or info relating to the disk in Event Viewer at all. Will work on putting XP on this (or something) and see how that likes the disk. Windows XP Pro SP3 x86 on same hardware. D410PT. BTW SATA mode in BIOS is set to IDE, as it was for the Win7 testing. There is definately a problem here, so I'll presume I get to run some other tests. XP detects the disk alright, but the volume it shows is 764GB, which is not a size of either partition on the disk, nor the unallocated: It does not show a file system in Disk Management. If you try to open it from Explorer, it says it is not formatted. EDIT: The Size of D: it sees being 746.52GB "partition" is a partition that doesn't exist. BUT this size is the same size you can see as unallocated in a previous screenshot. This is the amount of space that would be unallocated past the 2.2TB boundary. Note that this PC does not see the 1.8TB partition at all.

I was wondering if behaviours would be different if there was more than 2.2TB data total on the disk, with the partitions/volumes laid out like it is. That is why I made the comment about adding more to C: Would it be enough to just put this disk as a secondary on an XP system, or do you have the same requirement that the OS be booted from it?

I have copied some files and then did a compare to the same on C: and it is the same. There is one difference, a recycler is on the D: drive. If I should put more files on either, LMK. I was using a 167GB set. I am running Chkdsk now.